Search Results

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

Page 52/66 | < Previous Page | 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59  | Next Page >

  • How to have a run in an Service?

    - by user1497664
    I have implemented an service that runs in a seperate process. This service contains a separate thread where i have a socket connection. This thread has a run() where it is continuously sending data to the port. My problem is after triggering the run() in the thread i don't get any contact with it anymore, i can see in the program that have open the socket that it consciously sends the data but the idea was that i while it is running i could change data that it sends for an example time. here is my run in the external thread: public void run() { if(run) { // Team and player names message is sent when entering in a game setBaseMessage(); SendMessageToCOMPort(base_message + CalculateCRC(base_message)); sleep(); // waits for 100 ms } } Anyone have any idea what might be wrong ?

    Read the article

  • ThreadExceptionEventHandler and invoking delegates

    - by QmunkE
    If I assign a ThreadExceptionEventHandler to Application.ThreadException, why when I invoke a delegate method using a control on the main application thread are any exceptions thrown by that delegate not triggering the event handler? i.e. static void Main() { ... Application.ThreadException += new System.Threading.ThreadExceptionEventHandler(Application_ThreadException); Application.Run(new Form1()); } static void Application_ThreadException(object sender, System.Threading.ThreadExceptionEventArgs e) { Console.Error.Write("A thread exception occurred!"); } ... private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { Thread syncThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(this.ThrowException)); syncThread.Start(); } private void ThrowException() { button1.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate { // Not handled by ThreadExceptionEventHandler? throw new Exception(); })); } The context on this is that I have a background thread started from a form which is throwing an unhandled exception which terminates the application. I know this thread is going to be unreliable since it is network connectivity reliant and so subject to being terminated at any point, but I'm just interested as to why this scenario doesn't play out as I expect?

    Read the article

  • Why should I use a thread vs using a process?

    - by danmine
    I'm a newbie at this so please forgive me for my ignorance. Separating different parts of a program into different processes seems (to me) to make a more elegant program then just threading everything. In what scenario would it make sense to make things run on a thread vs separating the program into different processes? When should I use a thread? Edit: Anything on how (or if) they act differently with single core and multi core would also be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Best way to reuse a Runnable

    - by Gandalf
    I have a class that implements Runnable and am currently using an Executor as my thread pool to run tasks (indexing documents into Lucene). executor.execute(new LuceneDocIndexer(doc, writer)); My issue is that my Runnable class creates many Lucene Field objects and I would rather reuse them then create new ones every call. What's the best way to reuse these objects (Field objects are not thread safe so I cannot simple make them static) - should I create my own ThreadFactory? I notice that after a while the program starts to degrade drastically and the only thing I can think of is it's GC overhead. I am currently trying to profile the project to be sure this is even an issue - but for now lets just assume it is.

    Read the article

  • Can I have multiple instance of the mandlebrot example in one program?

    - by yan bellavance
    Basically what I did is I took the Mandlebrot example and have 3 instances of it in my program. So the program would look like a mainwindow that has 3 mandlebrot widgets in it, one besides the other. Is it possible that GDB doesnt support debugging multiple intances of a classe that derives from qthread or is it thread-unsafe to do so? I don't have any problems at run-time but when I put breakpoints in a function called by the QThread run() function I get a segmentation fault. I can clearly see that the function doesn't complete before returning to the breakpoint ie I the program stops at the breakpoint, I step into the lines of codes one by one but after a couple of instructions another thread startS using the function(even though they are different instances).

    Read the article

  • Swing: How do I run a job from AWT thread, but after a window was layed out?

    - by java.is.for.desktop
    My complete GUI runs inside the AWT thread, because I start the main window using SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait(...). Now I have a JDialog which has just to display a JLabel, which indicates that a certain job is in progress, and close that dialog after the job was finished. The problem is: the label is not displayed. That job seems to be started before JDialog was fully layed-out. When I just let the dialog open without waiting for a job and closing, the label is displayed. The last thing the dialog does in its ctor is setVisible(true). Things such as revalidate(), repaint(), ... don't help either. Even when I start a thread for the monitored job, and wait for it using someThread.join() it doesn't help, because the current thread (which is the AWT thread) is blocked by join, I guess. Replacing JDialog with JFrame doesn't help either. So, is the concept wrong in general? Or can I manage it to do certain job after it is ensured that a JDialog (or JFrame) is fully layed-out? Simplified algorithm of what I'm trying to achieve: Create a subclass of JDialog Ensure that it and its contents are fully layed-out Start a process and wait for it to finish (threaded or not, doesn't matter) Close the dialog I managed to write a reproducible test case: EDIT Problem from an answer is now addressed: This use case does display the label, but it fails to close after the "simulated process", because of dialog's modality. import java.awt.*; import javax.swing.*; public class _DialogTest2 { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait(new Runnable() { final JLabel jLabel = new JLabel("Please wait..."); @Override public void run() { JFrame myFrame = new JFrame("Main frame"); myFrame.setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE); myFrame.setSize(750, 500); myFrame.setLocationRelativeTo(null); myFrame.setVisible(true); JDialog d = new JDialog(myFrame, "I'm waiting"); d.setModalityType(Dialog.ModalityType.APPLICATION_MODAL); d.add(jLabel); d.setSize(300, 200); d.setLocationRelativeTo(null); d.setVisible(true); SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { try { Thread.sleep(3000); // simulate process jLabel.setText("Done"); } catch (InterruptedException ex) { } } }); d.setVisible(false); d.dispose(); myFrame.setVisible(false); myFrame.dispose(); } }); } }

    Read the article

  • LINQ Changeset multi-threading

    - by Xodarap
    I'm using LINQ to SQL and after I submit some changes I want to spawn a thread which looks through all the changes and updates our lucene index as necessary. My code looks vaguely like: (new Thread(() => { UpdateIndex(context.GetChangeSet()); }).Start(); Sometimes though I get an InvalidOperationException, which I think is because context.GetChangeSet() is not thread-safe, and so if the change set is modified in one thread while another thread is enumerating through it, problems arise. Is there a "thread-safe" version of GetChangeSet()? Or some way I can do ChangeSet.clone() or something?

    Read the article

  • WPF: issue updating UI from background thread

    - by Ted Shaffer
    My code launches a background thread. The background thread makes changes and wants the UI in the main thread to update. The code that launches the thread then waits looks something like: Thread fThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PerformSync)); fThread.IsBackground = true; fThread.Start(); fThread.Join(); MessageBox.Show("Synchronization complete"); When the background wants to update the UI, it sets a StatusMessage and calls the code below: static StatusMessage _statusMessage; public delegate void AddStatusDelegate(); private void AddStatus() { AddStatusDelegate methodForUIThread = delegate { _statusMessageList.Add(_statusMessage); }; this.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(methodForUIThread, System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherPriority.Send); } _statusMessageList is an ObservableCollection that is the source for a ListBox. The AddStatus method is called but the code on the main thread never executes - that is, _statusMessage is not added to _statusMessageList while the thread is executing. However, once it is complete (fThread.Join() returns), all the stacked up calls on the main thread are executed. But, if I display a message box between the calls to fThread.Start() and fThread.Join(), then the status messages are updated properly. What do I need to change so that the code in the main thread executes (UI updates) while waiting for the thread to terminate? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How do I best write my own background-working and communicatible (sending progress updates and getti

    - by Ivan
    I have to develop a class which can run it's own hard-coded task in a background thread and communicate with container class sending him progress updates and taking messages from it. I believe I am going to extend BackgroundWorker class but it looks a bit weird to extend and I haven't managed to find a good example wit Google. Can you share a link to a good example of solving such a task? Please don't offer placing a BackgroundWorker visually on a form and reading the standard tutorial, it's not for my case. Maybe I'd better not extend but encapsulate a BackgroundWorker, but I hardly understand how to use it outide WinForms designer either :-(

    Read the article

  • Does the Java Memory Model (JSR-133) imply that entering a monitor flushes the CPU data cache(s)?

    - by Durandal
    There is something that bugs me with the Java memory model (if i even understand everything correctly). If there are two threads A and B, there are no guarantees that B will ever see a value written by A, unless both A and B synchronize on the same monitor. For any system architecture that guarantees cache coherency between threads, there is no problem. But if the architecture does not support cache coherency in hardware, this essentially means that whenever a thread enters a monitor, all memory changes made before must be commited to main memory, and the cache must be invalidated. And it needs to be the entire data cache, not just a few lines, since the monitor has no information which variables in memory it guards. But that would surely impact performance of any application that needs to synchronize frequently (especially things like job queues with short running jobs). So can Java work reasonably well on architectures without hardware cache-coherency? If not, why doesn't the memory model make stronger guarantees about visibility? Wouldn't it be more efficient if the language would require information what is guarded by a monitor? As i see it the memory model gives us the worst of both worlds, the absolute need to synchronize, even if cache coherency is guaranteed in hardware, and on the other hand bad performance on incoherent architectures (full cache flushes). So shouldn't it be more strict (require information what is guarded by a monitor) or more lose and restrict potential platforms to cache-coherent architectures? As it is now, it doesn't make too much sense to me. Can somebody clear up why this specific memory model was choosen? EDIT: My use of strict and lose was a bad choice in retrospect. I used "strict" for the case where less guarantees are made and "lose" for the opposite. To avoid confusion, its probably better to speak in terms of stronger or weaker guarantees.

    Read the article

  • Thread is being killed by the OS

    - by Or.Ron
    I'm currently programming an app that extracts frames from a movie clip. I designed it so that the extraction will be done on a separate thread to prevent the application from freezing. The extraction process itself is taking a lot of resources, but works fine when used in the simulator. However, there are problems when building it for the iPad. When I perform another action (I'm telling my AV player to play while I extract frames), the thread unexpectedly stops working, and I believe it's being killed. I assume it's becauase I'm using a lot of resources, but not entirely sure. Here are my questions: 1. How can I tell if/why my thread stopping? 2. If it's really from over processing what should I do? I really need this action to be implemented. Heres some code im using: To create the thread: [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(startReading) toTarget:self withObject:nil]; I'll post any information you need, Thanks so much! Update I'm using GCD now and it populates the threads for me. However the OS still kills the threads. I know exactly when is it happening. when i tell my [AVplayer play]; it kills the thread. This issue is only happening in the actual iPad and not on the simulator

    Read the article

  • How do I read and write to a file using threads in java?

    - by WarmWaffles
    I'm writing an application where I need to read blocks in from a single file, each block is roughly 512 bytes. I am also needing to write blocks simultaneously. One of the ideas I had was BlockReader implements Runnable and BlockWriter implements Runnable and BlockManager manages both the reader and writer. The problem that I am seeing with most examples that I have found was locking problems and potential deadlock situations. Any ideas how to implement this?

    Read the article

  • Qt: How to use QTimer to print a message to a QTextBrowser every 10 seconds?

    - by Aaron McKellar
    Hello, I have working at this for hours and cannot figure it out nor can I find any help online that works. Basically the gist of what I am trying to accomplish is to have a Qt GUI with a button and a QTextBrowser. When I push the button I want it to diplay a message and then keep printing this message every 10 seconds. I figured I would use QTimer because it makes sense to have a timer to diplay the message every 10 seconds. When I originally implemented this into my buttonClicked() SLOT it caused the program to freeze. I looked online for a solution and found QApplication::processEvents(). So basically in my function I had something like this: while(1) { QTimer *timer; connect(...) //omitted parameters for this example timer.start(10000); ui->diplay->append("Message"); while(timer.isActive()) { QApplication::processEvents() } } I figured it would break out of the timer.isActive() while loop but it won't it simply stays in there. So I figured this is a threading issue. So I figured out how to use QThreads but I still can't get it to work. Basically when I create a thread with a timer on it and the thread tells the timer to start, the program closes and the console says "The program has unexpectedly finished". There has to be an easy way to do this but my track record with Qt has always been that th

    Read the article

  • java threads don't see shared boolean changes

    - by andymur
    Here the code class Aux implements Runnable { private Boolean isOn = false; private String statusMessage; private final Object lock; public Aux(String message, Object lock) { this.lock = lock; this.statusMessage = message; } @Override public void run() { for (;;) { synchronized (lock) { if (isOn && "left".equals(this.statusMessage)) { isOn = false; System.out.println(statusMessage); } else if (!isOn && "right".equals(this.statusMessage)) { isOn = true; System.out.println(statusMessage); } if ("left".equals(this.statusMessage)) { System.out.println("left " + isOn); } } } } } public class Question { public static void main(String [] args) { Object lock = new Object(); new Thread(new Aux("left", lock)).start(); new Thread(new Aux("right", lock)).start(); } } In this code I expect to see: left, right, left right and so on, but when Thread with "left" message changes isOn to false, Thread with "right" message don't see it and I get ("right true" and "left false" console messages), left thread don't get isOn in true, but right Thread can't change it cause it always see old isOn value (true). When i add volatile modifier to isOn nothing changes, but if I change isOn to some class with boolean field and change this field then threads are see changes and it works fine Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Tomcat thread waiting on and locking the same resource

    - by Adam Matan
    Consider the following Java\Tomcat thread dump: "http-0.0.0.0-4080-4" daemon prio=10 tid=0x0000000019a2b000 nid=0x360e in Object.wait() [0x0000000040b71000] java.lang.Thread.State: WAITING (on object monitor) at java.lang.Object.wait(Native Method) - waiting on <0x00002ab5565fe358> (a org.apache.tomcat.util.net.JIoEndpoint$Worker) at java.lang.Object.wait(Object.java:485) at org.apache.tomcat.util.net.JIoEndpoint$Worker.await(JIoEndpoint.java:458) - locked <0x00002ab5565fe358> (a org.apache.tomcat.util.net.JIoEndpoint$Worker) at org.apache.tomcat.util.net.JIoEndpoint$Worker.run(JIoEndpoint.java:484) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:662) Is this a deadlock? It seems that the same resource (0x00002ab5565fe358) is both locked and waited on - what does it mean?

    Read the article

  • Java redirected system output to jtext area, doesnt update until calculation is finished

    - by user1806716
    I have code that redirects system output to a jtext area, but that jtextarea doesnt update until the code is finished running. How do I modify the code to make the jtextarea update in real time during runtime? private void updateTextArea(final String text) { SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() { public void run() { consoleTextAreaInner.append(text); } }); } private void redirectSystemStreams() { OutputStream out = new OutputStream() { @Override public void write(int b) throws IOException { updateTextArea(String.valueOf((char) b)); } @Override public void write(byte[] b, int off, int len) throws IOException { updateTextArea(new String(b, off, len)); } @Override public void write(byte[] b) throws IOException { write(b, 0, b.length); } }; System.setOut(new PrintStream(out, true)); System.setErr(new PrintStream(out, true)); } The rest of the code is mainly just an actionlistener for a button: private void updateButtonActionPerformed(java.awt.event.ActionEvent evt) { // TODO add your handling code here: String shopRoot = this.shopRootDirTxtField.getText(); String updZipPath = this.updateZipTextField.getText(); this.mainUpdater = new ShopUpdater(new File(shopRoot), updZipPath); this.mainUpdater.update(); } That update() method begins the process of copying+pasting files on the file system and during that process uses system.out.println to provide an up-to-date status on where the program is currently at in reference to how many more files it has to copy.

    Read the article

  • Can one thread open a socket and other thread close it?

    - by Pkp
    I have some kernel threads in Linux kernel, inside my KLM. I have a server thread, that listens to the channel, Once it sees there is an incoming connection, it creates an accept socket, accepts the connection and spawns a child thread. It also passes the accepted socket to the child kernel thread as the (void *) argument. The code is working fine. I had a design question. Suppose now the threads have to be terminated, main and the child threads, what would be the best way to close the accept socket. I can see two ways, 1] The main thread waits for all the child threads to exit, each of the child threads close the accept sockets while exiting, the last child thread passes a signal to the main thread for it to exit . Here even though the main thread was the one that created the accept socket, the child threads close that socket, and they do this before the main thread exits. So is this acceptable? Any problems you guys forsee here? 2] Second is the main thread closes all the accept sockets it created before it exits. But there may be a possibility(corner case) that the main thread gets an exception and will have to close, so if it closes the accept sockets before exiting, the child threads using that socket will be in danger. Hence i am using the first case i mentioned.Let me know what you guys think?

    Read the article

  • C++: is it safe to read an integer variable that's being concurrently modified without locking?

    - by Hongli
    Suppose that I have an integer variable in a class, and this variable may be concurrently modified by other threads. Writes are protected by a mutex. Do I need to protect reads too? I've heard that there are some hardware architectures on which, if one thread modifies a variable, and another thread reads it, then the read result will be garbage; in this case I do need to protect reads. I've never seen such architectures though. This question assumes that a single transaction only consists of updating a single integer variable so I'm not worried about the states of any other variables that might also be involved in a transaction.

    Read the article

  • Best approach to synchronising properties across threads

    - by user290796
    Hi, I'm looking for some advice on the best approach to synchronising access to properties of an object in C++. The application has an internal cache of objects which have 10 properties. These objects are to be requested in sets which can then have their properties modified and be re-saved. They can be accessed by 2-4 threads at any given time but access is not intense so my options are: Lock the property accessors for each object using a critical section. This means lots of critical sections - one for each object. Return copies of the objects when requested and have an update function which locks a single critical section to update the object properties when appropriate. I think option 2 seems the most efficient but I just want to see if I'm missing a hidden 3rd option which would be more appropriate. Thanks, J

    Read the article

  • Delphi - Is there any equivalent to C# lock?

    - by CaldonCZE
    I'm writing a multi-threaded application in Delphi and need to use something to protect shared resources. In C# I'd use the "lock" keyword: private someMethod() { lock(mySharedObj) { //...do something with mySharedObj } } In Delphi I couldn't find anything similar, I found just TThread.Synchronize(someMethod) method, which prevents potential conflicts by calling someMethod in main VCL thread, but it isn't exactly what I want to do.... Edit: I'm using Delphi 6

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59  | Next Page >