Search Results

Search found 1638 results on 66 pages for 'multithreading'.

Page 48/66 | < Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55  | Next Page >

  • Fast way to pass a simple java object from one thread to another

    - by Adal
    I have a callback which receives an object. I make a copy of this object, and I must pass it on to another thread for further processing. It's very important for the callback to return as fast as possible. Ideally, the callback will write the copy to some sort of lock-free container. I only have the callback called from a single thread and one processing thread. I only need to pass a bunch of doubles to the other thread, and I know the maximum number of doubles (around 40). Any ideas? I'm not very familiar with Java, so I don't know the usual ways to pass stuff between threads.

    Read the article

  • Multi-threading concept and lock in c#

    - by Neeraj
    I read about lock, though not understood nothing at all. My question is why do we use a un-used object and lock that and how this makes something thread-safe or how this helps in multi-threading ? Isn't there other way to make thread-safe code. public class test { private object Lock { get; set; } ... lock (this.Lock) { ... } ... } Sorry is my question is very stupid, but i don't understand, although i've used it many times.

    Read the article

  • What is the fastest (possibly unsafe) way to read a byte[]?

    - by Aidiakapi
    I'm working on a server project in C#, and after a TCP message is received, it is parsed, and stored in a byte[] of exact size. (Not a buffer of fixed length, but a byte[] of an absolute length in which all data is stored.) Now for reading this byte[] I'll be creating some wrapper functions (also for compatibility), these are the signatures of all functions I need: public byte ReadByte(); public sbyte ReadSByte(); public short ReadShort(); public ushort ReadUShort(); public int ReadInt(); public uint ReadUInt(); public float ReadFloat(); public double ReadDouble(); public string ReadChars(int length); public string ReadString(); The string is a \0 terminated string, and is probably encoded in ASCII or UTF-8, but I cannot tell that for sure, since I'm not writing the client. The data exists of: byte[] _data; int _offset; Now I can write all those functions manually, like this: public byte ReadByte() { return _data[_offset++]; } public sbyte ReadSByte() { byte r = _data[_offset++]; if (r >= 128) return (sbyte)(r - 256); else return (sbyte)r; } public short ReadShort() { byte b1 = _data[_offset++]; byte b2 = _data[_offset++]; if (b1 >= 128) return (short)(b1 * 256 + b2 - 65536); else return (short)(b1 * 256 + b2); } public short ReadUShort() { byte b1 = _data[_offset++]; return (short)(b1 * 256 + _data[_offset++]); } But I wonder if there's a faster way, not excluding the use of unsafe code, since this seems a little bit too much work for simple processing.

    Read the article

  • C# Alternating threads

    - by Mutoh
    Imagine a situation in which there are one king and n number of minions submissed to him. When the king says "One!", one of the minions says "Two!", but only one of them. That is, only the fastest minion speaks while the others must wait for another call of the king. This is my try: using System; using System.Threading; class Program { static bool leaderGO = false; void Leader() { do { lock(this) { //Console.WriteLine("? {0}", leaderGO); if (leaderGO) Monitor.Wait(this); Console.WriteLine("> One!"); Thread.Sleep(200); leaderGO = true; Monitor.Pulse(this); } } while(true); } void Follower (char chant) { do { lock(this) { //Console.WriteLine("! {0}", leaderGO); if (!leaderGO) Monitor.Wait(this); Console.WriteLine("{0} Two!", chant); leaderGO = false; Monitor.Pulse(this); } } while(true); } static void Main() { Console.WriteLine("Go!\n"); Program m = new Program(); Thread king = new Thread(() => m.Leader()); Thread minion1 = new Thread(() => m.Follower('#')); Thread minion2 = new Thread(() => m.Follower('$')); king.Start(); minion1.Start(); minion2.Start(); Console.ReadKey(); king.Abort(); minion1.Abort(); minion2.Abort(); } } The expected output would be this (# and $ representing the two different minions): > One! # Two! > One! $ Two! > One! $ Two! ... The order in which they'd appear doesn't matter, it'd be random. The problem, however, is that this code, when compiled, produces this instead: > One! # Two! $ Two! > One! # Two! > One! $ Two! # Two! ... That is, more than one minion speaks at the same time. This would cause quite the tumult with even more minions, and a king shoudln't allow a meddling of this kind. What would be a possible solution?

    Read the article

  • Repeated host lookups failing in urllib2

    - by reve_etrange
    I have code which issues many HTTP GET requests using Python's urllib2, in several threads, writing the responses into files (one per thread). During execution, it looks like many of the host lookups fail (causing a name or service unknown error, see appended error log for an example). Is this due to a flaky DNS service? Is it bad practice to rely on DNS caching, if the host name isn't changing? I.e. should a single lookup's result be passed into the urlopen? Exception in thread Thread-16: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python2.6/threading.py", line 532, in __bootstrap_inner self.run() File "/home/da/local/bin/ThreadedDownloader.py", line 61, in run page = urllib2.urlopen(url) # get the page File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 126, in urlopen return _opener.open(url, data, timeout) File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 391, in open response = self._open(req, data) File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 409, in _open '_open', req) File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 369, in _call_chain result = func(*args) File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1170, in http_open return self.do_open(httplib.HTTPConnection, req) File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1145, in do_open raise URLError(err) URLError: <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>

    Read the article

  • How to stop Interruptible Threads in Java

    - by Dr.Lesh
    I have a Java application that I CAN'T EDIT that starts a Thread wich has this run method: public void run(){ while(true){ System.out.println("Something"); } } And at a certain moment I wanna stop it, but if I use thread.interrupt(); it won't work. If I use thread.stop(); it works, but this method is deprecated and its use is discouraged because soon it will be removed from JVM. Does anyone knows how to do it? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • pthread_create followed by pthread_detach still results in possibly lost error in Valgrind.

    - by alesplin
    I'm having a problem with Valgrind telling me I have some memory possible lost: ==23205== 544 bytes in 2 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 156 of 265 ==23205== at 0x6022879: calloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==23205== by 0x540E209: allocate_dtv (in /lib/ld-2.12.1.so) ==23205== by 0x540E91D: _dl_allocate_tls (in /lib/ld-2.12.1.so) ==23205== by 0x623068D: pthread_create@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (in /lib/libpthread-2.12.1.so) ==23205== by 0x758D66: MTPCreateThreadPool (MTP.c:290) ==23205== by 0x405787: main (MServer.c:317) The code that creates these threads (MTPCreateThreadPool) basically gets an index into a block of waiting pthread_t slots, and creates a thread with that. TI becomes a pointer to a struct that has a thread index and a pthread_t. (simplified/sanitized): for (tindex = 0; tindex < NumThreads; tindex++) { int rc; TI = &TP->ThreadInfo[tindex]; TI->ThreadID = tindex; rc = pthread_create(&TI->ThreadHandle,NULL,MTPHandleRequestsLoop,TI); /* check for non-success that I've omitted */ pthread_detach(&TI->ThreadHandle); } Then we have a function MTPDestroyThreadPool that loops through all the threads we created and cancels them (since the MTPHandleRequestsLoop doesn't exit). for (tindex = 0; tindex < NumThreads; tindex++) { pthread_cancel(TP->ThreadInfo[tindex].ThreadHandle); } I've read elsewhere (including other questions here on SO) that detaching a thread explicitly would prevent this possibly lost error, but it clearly isn't. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How do I stop Ant from hanging after executing a java program that attempted to interrupt a thread (and failed) and continued?

    - by Zugwalt
    I have Ant build and execute a java program. This program tries to do something that sometimes hangs, so we execute it in a thread. actionThread.start(); try { actionThread.join(10000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { System.out.println("InterruptedException: "+e.getMessage()); } if (actionThread.isAlive()) { actionThread.interrupt(); System.out.println("Thread timed out and never died"); } The ant call looks like this: <java fork="true" failonerror="yes" classname="myPackage.myPathName" classpath="build"> <arg line=""/> <classpath> <pathelement location="bin" /> <fileset dir="lib"> <include name="**/*.jar"/> </fileset> </classpath> </java> And when this runs I see the "Thread timed out and never died" statement, and I also see the main program finish execution, but then Ant just hangs. Presumably it is waiting for the child threads to finish, but they never will. How can I have Ant be done once it is done executing main() and just kill or ignore dead threads?

    Read the article

  • No matter what, I can't get this stupid progress bar to update from a thread!

    - by Synthetix
    I have a Windows app written in C (using gcc/MinGW) that works pretty well except for a few UI problems. One, I simply cannot get the progress bar to update from a thread. In fact, I probably can't get ANY UI stuff to update. Basically, I have a spawned thread that does some processing, and from that thread I attempt to update the progress bar in the main thread. I tried this by using PostMessage() to the main hwnd, but no luck even though I can do other things like open message boxes. However, it's unclear whether the message box is getting called within the thread or on the main thread. Here's some code: //in header/globally accessible HWND wnd; //main application window HWND progress_bar; //progress bar typedef struct { //to pass to thread DWORD mainThreadId; HWND mainHwnd; char *filename; } THREADSTUFF; //callback function LRESULT CALLBACK WndProc(HWND hwnd, UINT msg, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam){ switch(msg){ case WM_CREATE:{ //create progress bar progress_bar = CreateWindowEx( 0, PROGRESS_CLASS, (LPCTSTR)NULL, WS_CHILD | WS_VISIBLE, 79,164,455,15, hwnd, (HMENU)20, NULL, NULL); break; } case WM_COMMAND:{ if(LOWORD(wParam)==2){ //do some processing in a thread //struct of stuff I need to pass to thread THREADSTUFF *threadStuff; threadStuff = (THREADSTUFF*)malloc(sizeof(*threadStuff)); threadStuff->mainThreadId = GetCurrentThreadId(); threadStuff->mainHwnd = hwnd; threadStuff->filename = (void*)&filename; hThread1 = CreateThread(NULL,0,convertFile (LPVOID)threadStuff,0,NULL); }else if(LOWORD(wParam)==5){ //update progress bar MessageBox(hwnd,"I got a message!", "Message", MB_OK | MB_ICONINFORMATION); PostMessage(progress_bar,PBM_STEPIT,0,CLR_DEFAULT); } break; } } } This all seems to work okay. The problem is in the thread: DWORD WINAPI convertFile(LPVOID params){ //get passed params, this works perfectly fine THREADSTUFF *tData = (THREADSTUFF*)params; MessageBox(tData->mainHwnd,tData->filename,"File name",MB_OK | MB_ICONINFORMATION); //yep PostThreadMessage(tData->mainThreadId,WM_COMMAND,5,0); //only shows message PostMessage(tData->mainHwnd,WM_COMMAND,5,0); //only shows message } When I say, "only shows message," that means the MessageBox() function in the callback works, but not the PostMessage() to update the position of the progress bar. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • logging one thread in Java using log4j

    - by Javier
    I have an web application written in Java, and I have a thread-pool. The application is huge, and I cannot make major changes, for example, I cannot change log4j. I am executing a batch process in the thread pool, and I want to log everything that goes is executed to execute that process. There will always be just one thread active in the thread pool. Any ideas of how can I do that?

    Read the article

  • multiple move operations and data processes in work thread

    - by younevertell
    main thread-- start workthread--StartStage(get list of positions for data process) -- move to one position -- data sampling*strong text*-- data collection--data analysis------data sampling*strong text* basically, work thread does the data sampling*strong text*-- data collection--data analysis------data sampling*strong text* loop for one positioin until press stop or target is obtained. my questions: After work thread finishs the loop for one positioin, it would end itself. now how to make the work thread moves to the next position to do the data process loop after work thread finish one position work, would not end itself until data process for all the positions are done? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • What happens to an instance of ServerSocket blocked inside accept(), when I drop all references to i

    - by Hanno Fietz
    In a multithreaded Java application, I just tracked down a strange-looking bug, realizing that what seemed to be happening was this: one of my objects was storing a reference to an instance of ServerSocket on startup, one thread would, in its main loop in run(), call accept() on the socket while the socket was still waiting for a connection, another thread would try to restart the component under some conditions, the restart process missed the cleanup sequence before it reached the initialization sequence as a result, the reference to the socket was overwritten with a new instance, which then wasn't able to bind() anymore the socket which was blocking inside the accept() wasn't accessible anymore, leaving a complete shutdown and restart of the application as the only way to get rid of it. Which leaves me wondering: with no references left to the ServerSocket instance, what would free the socket for a new connection? At what point would the ServerSocket become garbage collected? In general, what are good practices I can follow to avoid this type of bug?

    Read the article

  • Python Terminated Thread Cannot Restart

    - by Mel Kaye
    Hello, I have a thread that gets executed when some action occurs. Given the logic of the program, the thread cannot possibly be started while another instance of it is still running. Yet when I call it a second time, I get a "RuntimeError: thread already started" error. I added a check to see if it is actually alive using the Thread.is_alive() function, and it is actually dead. What am I doing wrong? I can provide more details as are needed.

    Read the article

  • Are Thread.stop and friends ever safe in Java?

    - by Stephen C
    The stop(), suspend(), and resume() in java.lang.Thread are deprecated because they are unsafe. The Sun recommended work around is to use Thread.interrupt(), but that approach doesn't work in all cases. For example, if you are call a library method that doesn't explicitly or implicitly check the interrupted flag, you have no choice but to wait for the call to finish. So, I'm wondering if it is possible to characterize situations where it is (provably) safe to call stop() on a Thread. For example, would it be safe to stop() a thread that did nothing but call find(...) or match(...) on a java.util.regex.Matcher? (If there are any Sun engineers reading this ... a definitive answer would be really appreciated.) EDIT: Answers that simply restate the mantra that you should not call stop() because it is deprecated, unsafe, whatever are missing the point of this question. I know that that it is genuinely unsafe in the majority of cases, and that if there is a viable alternative you should always use that instead. This question is about the subset cases where it is safe. Specifically, what is that subset?

    Read the article

  • Failing faster when URL content is not found, howto

    - by Jam
    I have a thread pool that loops over a bunch of pages and checks to see if some string is there or not. If String is found, or not found response is near instant, however if server is offline or application is not running getting a rejection seems to take seconds How can I change my code to fail faster? for (Thread thread : pool) { thread.start(); } for (Thread thread : pool) { try { thread.join(); } catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } Here is my run method @Override public void run() { for (Box b : boxes) { try { connection = new URL(b.getUrl()).openConnection(); scanner = new Scanner(connection.getInputStream()); scanner.useDelimiter("\\Z"); content = scanner.next(); if (content.equals("YES")) { } else { System.out.println("\tFAILED ON " + b.getName() + " BAD APPLICATION STATE"); } } catch (Exception ex) { System.out.println("\tFAILED ON " + b.getName() + " BAD APPLICATION STATE"); } } }

    Read the article

  • Using locks inside a loop

    - by Xaqron
    // Member Variable private readonly object _syncLock = new object(); // Now inside a static method foreach (var lazyObject in plugins) { if ((string)lazyObject.Metadata["key"] = "something") { lock (_syncLock) { if (!lazyObject.IsValueCreated) lazyObject.value.DoSomething(); } return lazyObject.value; } } Here I need synchronized access per loop. There are many threads iterating this loop and based on the key they are looking for, a lazy instance is created and returned. lazyObject should not be created more that one time. Although Lazy class is for doing so and despite of the used lock, under high threading I have more than one instance created (I track this with a Interlocked.Increment on a volatile shared int and log it somewhere). The problem is I don't have access to definition of Lazy and MEF defines how the Lazy class create objects. My questions: 1) Why the lock doesn't work ? 2) Should I use an array of locks instead of one lock for performance improvement ?

    Read the article

  • how to call windows paint event from child thread

    - by RAJ K
    If I am wrong then please correct me as I am new in this. I have one thread which display image captured from webcam on a windows created using CreateWindowEx() function. Now when i execute my program I can see that my paint code (in WindowProc()) in never reached (called InvalidateRect() from child thread to redraw), checked using breakpoint. Actually frame capture and display is being done in thread and I think because its in child thread and Window is in Main thread that is why its not able to call paint event. Can you help me on this

    Read the article

  • Mouse move and thread

    - by bsebi
    When I move the mouse over the window, the program runs much faster (cc. 3 times). This is a real time webcam .Net/Mono application running on a MacBook. On Windows works perfect. Is this maybe a power saving function of the laptop? The code: Thread t = new Thread(Foo); t.Priority = ThreadPriority.Highest; // I've tried without priority too, doesn't matter t.Start(); ... void Foo() { while (true) { ++k; // then write k to the window somehow } }

    Read the article

  • Looking for suggestions about an architecture of a MultiThreaded app.

    - by Dimitri
    Hello everyone. I am looking to develop a multithreaded application that will be running in unconditional loop and processing high volume of data. High volume is 2000+ records per minute. Processing will involve data retrieval, calculations and data updates. I need the application to perform so that there is virtually no back log, meaning i need to be able to finish up all of the 2000 points in one minute or even faster. Our current implementation features a multithreaded application that is spawn multiple times (from 10 to 20) and we are noticing that it's not handling data as expected and i even feel that instances of the application compete with each other for processor time and eventually if not slowing, not benefiting each other for sure. I would like to know what would be the best approach: have a single instance running but maximize threads that can run simultaneously? or is there other ways i don't know? I'm open to suggestions. Thank you in advance

    Read the article

  • Help me find article on Multi-threading and Event Handling in Java

    - by JDR
    I once read an article on how to properly write event handlers for multi-threading in Java, but I can't for the life of me find it anymore. It described the pitfalls and potentials for deadlocks that can occur when firing events (not Swing events mind you, but general events like model update notifications). To clarify, the situation would be as such: // let's say this is code from an MVC model somewhere public void setSomeProperty(String myProperty){ if(!this.myProperty.equals(myProperty)){ this.myProperty = myProperty; fireMyPropertyChangedEvent(...); } } The article described how passing control to arbitrary external listener code was a potential cause for deadlock. I now find myself in a situation where I need to fire such events in a multithreaded environment and I would very much like to read the article again to see what it has to say before I continue. Does anyone know the article I'm referring to? I believe it came as a (fairly short) PDF. It started off with an initial naive implementation and incrementally pointed out flaws and improved upon it. It ended with a sort of final proper-way-to-fire-multithreaded-events. I've searched endlessly in my browse history and on google, but all I could find were endless amounts topics on Swing event dispatch threads. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to call a function though Control.BeginInvoke in a signal-slot-like fashion?

    - by Dimitri C.
    I'd like a delegate that calls a function in a different thread when it is invoked. Currently, I'm using the following implementation: delegate void someFunctionDelegate(); //... someFunctionDelegate callBackFunction = someForm.SomeFunction; someForm.Invoke(someFunctionDelegate); However, I'd like a more compact form, combining both the someForm instance and the SomeForm.SomeFunction member function. I'm thinking of something like this: var callBackFunction = new AsynchronousCrossThreadDelegate(someForm, SomeForm.SomeFunction); callBackFunction(); // Should call someForm.BeginInvoke(SomeForm.SomeFunction); Is there a way to do so in C#/.NET? Update I'm looking for a solution that will work for functions with 0 or more parameters.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55  | Next Page >