Search Results

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

Page 28/66 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

  • Does operator new allocate on THREAD heap?

    - by Jonas Byström
    My problem seems to be this: heap data allocated by one thread (that later dies) seems to die as well. As so: Thread X: starts Thread Y: starts Thread X: ptr = new some bytes Thread X: dies Thread Y: tries to use ptr - and crashes! So far, I've only seen this problem on Darwin (Mac OS 10.5 and 10.6), but haven't tried more other platforms than Windows and Linux (Ubuntu) where it works as expected. I've had this problem for some time, so any know-how or more information about this is highly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Why use SyncLocks in .NET for simple operations when Interlocked class is available?

    - by rwmnau
    I've been doing simple multi-threading in VB.NET for a while, and have just gotten into my first large multi-threaded project. I've always done everything using the Synclock statement because I didn't think there was a better way. I just learned about the Interlocked Class - it makes it look as though all this: Private SomeInt as Integer Private SomeInt_LockObject as New Object Public Sub IntrementSomeInt Synclock SomeInt_LockObject SomeInt += 1 End Synclock End Sub Can be replaced with a single statement: Interlocked.Increment(SomeInt) This handles all the locking internally and modifies the number. This would be much simpler than writing my own locks for simple operations (longer-running or more complicated operations obviously still need their own locking). Is there a reason why I'd rolling my own locking, using dedicated locking objects, when I can accomplish the same thing using the Interlocked methods?

    Read the article

  • Update C# Chart using BackgroundWorker

    - by Mark
    I am currently trying to update a chart which is on my form to the background worker using: bwCharter.RunWorkerAsync(chart1); Which runs: private void bcCharter_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e) { System.Windows.Forms.DataVisualization.Charting.Chart chart = null; // Convert e.Argument to chart //.. // Converted.. chart.Series.Clear(); e.Result=chart; setChart(c.chart); } private void setChart(System.Windows.Forms.DataVisualization.Charting.Chart arg) { if (chart1.InvokeRequired) { chart1.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate { setChart(arg); })); return; } chart1 = arg; } However, at the point of clearing the series, an exception is thrown. Basically, I want to do a whole lot more processing after clearing the series, which slows the GUI down completely - so wanted this in another thread. I thought that by passing it as an argument, I should be safe, but apparently not! Interestingly, the chart is on a tab page. I can run this over and over if the tabpage is in the background, but if I run this, look at the chart, hide it again, and re-run, it throws the exception. Obviously, it throws if the chart is in the foreground as well. Can anyone suggest what I can do differently? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Impossible to be const-correct when combining data and it's lock?

    - by Graeme
    I've been looking at ways to combine a piece of data which will be accessed by multiple threads alongside the lock provisioned for thread-safety. I think I've got to a point where I don't think its possible to do this whilst maintaining const-correctness. Take the following class for example: template <typename TType, typename TMutex> class basic_lockable_type { public: typedef TMutex lock_type; public: template <typename... TArgs> explicit basic_lockable_type(TArgs&&... args) : TType(std::forward<TArgs...>(args)...) {} TType& data() { return data_; } const TType& data() const { return data_; } void lock() { mutex_.lock(); } void unlock() { mutex_.unlock(); } private: TType data_; mutable TMutex mutex_; }; typedef basic_lockable_type<std::vector<int>, std::mutex> vector_with_lock; In this I try to combine the data and lock, marking mutex_ as mutable. Unfortunately this isn't enough as I see it because when used, vector_with_lock would have to be marked as mutable in order for a read operation to be performed from a const function which isn't entirely correct (data_ should be mutable from a const). void print_values() const { std::lock_guard<vector_with_lock>(values_); for(const int val : values_) { std::cout << val << std::endl; } } vector_with_lock values_; Can anyone see anyway around this such that const-correctness is maintained whilst combining data and lock? Also, have I made any incorrect assumptions here?

    Read the article

  • Async Socket Listener on separate thread - VB.net

    - by TheHockeyGeek
    I am trying to use the code from Microsoft for an Async Socket connection. It appears the listener runs in the main thread locking the GUI. I am new at both socket connections and multi-threading all at the same time. Having a hard time getting my mind wrapped around this all at once. The code used is at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/fx6588te.aspx Using this example, how can I move the listener to its own thread? Public Shared Sub Main() ' Data buffer for incoming data. Dim bytes() As Byte = New [Byte](1023) {} ' Establish the local endpoint for the socket. Dim ipHostInfo As IPHostEntry = Dns.GetHostEntry(Dns.GetHostName()) Dim ipAddress As IPAddress = ipHostInfo.AddressList(1) Dim localEndPoint As New IPEndPoint(ipAddress, 11000) ' Create a TCP/IP socket. Dim listener As New Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Stream, ProtocolType.Tcp) ' Bind the socket to the local endpoint and listen for incoming connections. listener.Bind(localEndPoint) listener.Listen(100)

    Read the article

  • Thread Proc for an instancable class?

    - by user146780
    Basically I have a class and it is instincable (not static). Basically I want the class to be able to generate its own threads and manage its own stuff. I don't want to make a global callback for each instance I make, this doesnt seem clean and proper to me. What is the proper way of doing what I want. If I try to pass the threadproc to CreateThread and it is the proc from a class instance the compiler says I cannot do this. What is the best way of achieving what I want? Thanks

    Read the article

  • SwingWorker in Java (beginner question)

    - by Malachi
    I am relatively new to multi-threading and want to execute a background task using a Swingworker thread - the method that is called does not actually return anything but I would like to be notified when it has completed. The code I have so far doesn't appear to be working: private void crawl(ActionEvent evt) { try { SwingWorker<Void, Void> crawler = new SwingWorker<Void, Void>() { @Override protected Void doInBackground() throws Exception { Discoverer discover = new Discoverer(); discover.crawl(); return null; } @Override protected void done() { JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(jfThis, "Finished Crawling", "Success", JOptionPane.INFORMATION_MESSAGE); } }; crawler.execute(); } catch (Exception ex) { JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(this, ex.getMessage(), "Exception", JOptionPane.ERROR_MESSAGE); } } Any feedback/advice would be greatly appreciated as multi-threading is a big area of programming that I am weak in.

    Read the article

  • can i know the Thread runnable class attributes in java?

    - by dori naji
    probability this question have been asked before but i cant find anything in my searching mechanism. I am trying to create a multiple threads, in an array list but i want to retrieve them from an arraylist and filter them by the attribute of w1 i used in my code. any ideas ? w1 = new FirstWorker(ProductsList, OrdersList, s); FirstWorkerThread = new Thread(w1); ThreadArrayList.add(FirstWorkerThread); //I know i cant do the code below but i want to do that how ? for(Thread x : ThreadArrayList){ x.ProductsList } this is FirstWorker class import java.lang.String; import java.util.HashMap; /* * To change this template, choose Tools | Templates and open the template in * the editor. */ /** * * @author Dimitris */ public class FirstWorker extends Thread implements Runnable { private OrderList orderlist; private ProductList productlist; private String Worker; boolean Stop; private int speed = 1000; public FirstWorker(ProductList productlist, OrderList orderlist, String Worker) { this.productlist = productlist; this.orderlist = orderlist; this.Worker = Worker; this.Stop = true; } public void run() { if (Stop == true) { try { Thread.sleep(100); } catch (InterruptedException e) { } while (orderlist.returnLengthofOrder() != 0) { if (Thread.interrupted()) { System.out.println("I am in the thread inturrupt"); // We've been interrupted: no more crunching. return; } if (orderlist.getDone() == true) { } else if (orderlist.getDone() == false) { orderlist.setDoneTrue(); orderlist.Purchased(Worker); orderlist.setDoneFalse(); try { Thread.sleep(this.speed); } catch (InterruptedException e) { return; } } } } } public void setWork() { Stop = false; } public void setSpeed(int speed) { this.speed = speed; } }

    Read the article

  • Ruby Thread with "watchdog"

    - by Sergio Campamá
    I'm implementing a ruby server for handling sockets being created from GPRS modules. The thing is that when the module powers down, there's no indication that the socket closed. I'm doing threads to handle multiple sockets with the same server. What I'm asking is this: Is there a way to use a timer inside a thread, reset it after every socket input, and that if it hits the timeout, closes the thread? Where can I find more information about this? EDIT: Code example that doesn't detect the socket closing require 'socket' server = TCPServer.open(41000) loop do Thread.start(server.accept) do |client| puts "Client connected" begin loop do line = client.readline open('log.txt', 'a') { |f| f.puts line.strip } end rescue puts "Client disconnected" end end end

    Read the article

  • Kill a Perl system call after a timeout

    - by Fergal
    I've got a Perl script I'm using for running a file processing tool which is started using backticks. The problem is that occasionally the tool hangs and It needs to be killed in order for the rest of the files to be processed. Whats the best way best way to apply a timeout after which the parent script will kill the hung process? At the moment I'm using: foreach $file (@FILES) { $runResult = `mytool $file >> $file.log`; } But when mytool hangs after n seconds I'd like to be able to kill it and continue to the next file.

    Read the article

  • Thread pool in scala

    - by ghedas
    I have a project that is actor-based and for one part of it I must use some actors that receive message after that one actor assigns to each request separately and each actor is responsible for doing its message request, so I need something like a thread pool for actors of my project, are there any features in Scala that is useful for my necessity? how can I achieve this goal? tanks a lot for your attention!

    Read the article

  • How to re-use a thread in Java ?

    - by David
    I am a building a console Sudoku Solver where the main objective is raw speed. I now have a ManagerThread that starts WorkerThreads to compute the neibhbors of each cell. So one WorkerThread is started for each cell right now. How can I re-use an existing thread that has completed its work? The Thread Pool Pattern seems to be the solution, but I don't understand what to do to prevent the thread from dying once its job has been completed. ps : I do not expect to gain much performance for this particular task, just want to experiment how multi-threading works before applying it to the more complex parts of the code. Thanks

    Read the article

  • {DCC Warning} W1036 Variable '$frame' might not have been initialized?

    - by Gad D Lord
    Any ideas why I get this warning in Delphi XE: [DCC Warning] Form1.pas(250): W1036 Variable '$frame' might not have been initialized procedure TForm1.Action1Execute(Sender: TObject); var Thread: TThread; begin ... Thread := TThread.CreateAnonymousThread( procedure{Anonymos}() procedure ShowLoading(const Show: Boolean); begin /// <------------- WARNING IS GIVEN FOR THIS LINE (line number 250) Thread.Synchronize(Thread, procedure{Anonymous}() begin ... Button1.Enabled := not Show; ... end ); end; var i: Integer; begin ShowLoading(true); try Thread.Synchronize(Thread, procedure{Anonymous}() begin ... // some UI updates end Thread.Synchronize(Thread, procedure{Anonymous}() begin ... // some UI updates end ); finally ShowLoading(false); end; end ).NameThread('Some Thread Name'); Thread.Start; end; I do not have anywhere in my code a variable names frame nor $frame. I am even not sure how $frame with $ sign can be a valid identifier. Smells like compiler magic to me. PS: Of course the real life xosw is having other than Form1, Button1, Action1 names.

    Read the article

  • Cannot implicity convert type void to System.Threading.Tasks.Task<bool>

    - by sagesky36
    I have a WCF Service that contains the following method. All the methods in the service are asynchrounous and compile just fine. public async Task<Boolean> ValidateRegistrationAsync(String strUserName) { try { using (YeagerTechEntities DbContext = new YeagerTechEntities()) { DbContext.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled = false; DbContext.Database.Connection.Open(); var reg = await DbContext.aspnet_Users.FirstOrDefaultAsync(f => f.UserName == strUserName); if (reg != null) return true; else return false; } } catch (Exception) { throw; } } My client application was set to access the WCF service with the check box for the "Allow generation of asynchronous operations" and it generated the proxy just fine. I am receiving the above subject error when trying to call this WCF service method from my client with the following code. Mind you, I know what the error message means, but this is my first time trying to call an asynchronous task in a WCF service from a client. Task<Boolean> blnMbrShip = db.ValidateRegistrationAsync(FormsAuthentication.Decrypt(cn.Value).Name); What do I need to do to properly call the method so the design time compile error disappears? Thanks so much in advance...

    Read the article

  • Monitor.Wait, Pulse - When worker thread should conditionally behave as an actual worker thread

    - by Griever
    My particular scenario: - Main thread starts a worker thread. - Main thread needs to block itself until either worker thread is completed (yeah funny) or worker thread itself informs main thread to go on Alright, so what I did in main thread: wokerThread.Start(lockObj); lock(lockObj) Monitor.Wait(lockObj); Somewhere in worker thread: if(mainThreadShouldGoOn) lock(lockObj) Monitor.Pulse(lockObj); Also, at the end of worker thread: lock(lockObj) Monitor.Pulse(lockObj); So far, it's working perfect. But is it a good solution? Is there a better one?

    Read the article

  • Unhandled exceptions in BackgroundWorker

    - by edg
    My WinForms app uses a number of BackgroundWorker objects to retrieve information from a database. I'm using BackgroundWorker because it allows the UI to remain unblocked during long-running database queries and it simplifies the threading model for me. I'm getting occasional DatabaseExceptions in some of these background threads, and I have witnessed at least one of these exceptions in a worker thread while debugging. I'm fairly confident these exceptions are timeouts which I suppose its reasonable to expect from time to time. My question is about what happens when an unhandled exception occurs in one of these background worker threads. I don't think I can catch an exception in another thread, but can I expect my WorkerCompleted method to be executed? Is there any property or method of the BackgroundWorker I can interrogate for exceptions?

    Read the article

  • Using SetThreadAffinityMask function imported from kernel32.dll in C # code.

    - by DotNetBeginner
    I am trying to set Thread Affinity using SetThreadAffinityMask function imported from kernel32.dll in C # code of mine. This is how I import SetThreadAffinityMask function from "kernel32.dll" in my C# .net code [DllImport("kernel32.dll")] static extern IntPtr SetThreadAffinityMask(IntPtr hThread, IntPtr dwThreadAffinityMask); I am creating 3 threads Thread t1=new Thread(some delegate); Thread t2=new Thread(some delegate); Thread t3=new Thread(some delegate); I wish to set Thread affinity for t1,t2 & t3 for which I am using SetThreadAffinityMask function. But I am not getting how to pass parameters to this function. SetThreadAffinityMask takes two parameters 1. HANDLE hThread 2. DWORD_PTR dwThreadAffinityMask Please help me in using SetThreadAffinityMask function in C# Thanks in advance !

    Read the article

  • Thread safe lazy contruction of a singleton in C++

    - by pauldoo
    Is there a way to implement a singleton object in C++ that is: Lazily constructed in a thread safe manner (two threads might simultaneously be the first user of the singleton - it should still only be constructed once). Doesn't rely on static variables being constructed beforehand (so the singleton object is itself safe to use during the construction of static variables). (I don't know my C++ well enough, but is it the case that integral and constant static variables are initialized before any code is executed (ie, even before static constructors are executed - their values may already be "initialized" in the program image)? If so - perhaps this can be exploited to implement a singleton mutex - which can in turn be used to guard the creation of the real singleton..) Excellent, it seems that I have a couple of good answers now (shame I can't mark 2 or 3 as being the answer). There appears to be two broad solutions: Use static initialisation (as opposed to dynamic initialisation) of a POD static varible, and implementing my own mutex with that using the builtin atomic instructions. This was the type of solution I was hinting at in my question, and I believe I knew already. Use some other library function like pthread_once or boost::call_once. These I certainly didn't know about - and am very grateful for the answers posted.

    Read the article

  • Wait on multiple condition variables on Linux without unnecessary sleeps?

    - by Joseph Garvin
    I'm writing a latency sensitive app that in effect wants to wait on multiple condition variables at once. I've read before of several ways to get this functionality on Linux (apparently this is builtin on Windows), but none of them seem suitable for my app. The methods I know of are: Have one thread wait on each of the condition variables you want to wait on, which when woken will signal a single condition variable which you wait on instead. Cycling through multiple condition variables with a timed wait. Writing dummy bytes to files or pipes instead, and polling on those. #1 & #2 are unsuitable because they cause unnecessary sleeping. With #1, you have to wait for the dummy thread to wake up, then signal the real thread, then for the real thread to wake up, instead of the real thread just waking up to begin with -- the extra scheduler quantum spent on this actually matters for my app, and I'd prefer not to have to use a full fledged RTOS. #2 is even worse, you potentially spend N * timeout time asleep, or your timeout will be 0 in which case you never sleep (endlessly burning CPU and starving other threads is also bad). For #3, pipes are problematic because if the thread being 'signaled' is busy or even crashes (I'm in fact dealing with separate process rather than threads -- the mutexes and conditions would be stored in shared memory), then the writing thread will be stuck because the pipe's buffer will be full, as will any other clients. Files are problematic because you'd be growing it endlessly the longer the app ran. Is there a better way to do this? Curious for answers appropriate for Solaris as well.

    Read the article

  • how to multithread on a python server

    - by user3732790
    HELP please i have this code import socket from threading import * import time HOST = '' # Symbolic name meaning all available interfaces PORT = 8888 # Arbitrary non-privileged port s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM) print ('Socket created') s.bind((HOST, PORT)) print ('Socket bind complete') s.listen(10) print ('Socket now listening') def listen(conn): odata = "" end = 'end' while end == 'end': data = conn.recv(1024) if data != odata: odata = data print(data) if data == b'end': end = "" print("conection ended") conn.close() while True: time.sleep(1) conn, addr = s.accept() print ('Connected with ' + addr[0] + ':' + str(addr[1])) Thread.start_new_thread(listen,(conn)) and i would like it so that when ever a person comes onto the server it has its own thread. but i can't get it to work please someone help me. :_( here is the error code: Socket created Socket bind complete Socket now listening Connected with 127.0.0.1:61475 Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Users\Myles\Desktop\test recever - Copy.py", line 29, in <module> Thread.start_new_thread(listen,(conn)) AttributeError: type object 'Thread' has no attribute 'start_new_thread' i am on python version 3.4.0 and here is the users code: import socket #for sockets import time s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM) print('Socket Created') host = 'localhost' port = 8888 remote_ip = socket.gethostbyname( host ) print('Ip address of ' + host + ' is ' + remote_ip) #Connect to remote server s.connect((remote_ip , port)) print ('Socket Connected to ' + host + ' on ip ' + remote_ip) while True: message = input("> ") #Set the whole string s.send(message.encode('utf-8')) print ('Message send successfully') data = s.recv(1024) print(data) s.close

    Read the article

  • C# How to kill parent thread

    - by Royson
    A parent has several child threads. If user click on stop button the parent thread should be killed with all child threads. //calls a main thread mainThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(startWorking)); mainThread.Start(); //////////////////////////////////////////////// startWorking() { ManualResetEventInstance = new ManualResetEvent(false); ThreadPool.SetMaxThreads(m_ThreadPoolLimit, m_ThreadPoolLimit); for(int i = 0; i < list.count ; i++) { ThreadData obj_ThreadData = new ThreadData(); obj_ThreadData.name = list[i]; m_ThreadCount++; //execute WaitCallback obj_waitCallBack = new WaitCallback(startParsing); ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(obj_waitCallBack, obj_ThreadData); } ManualResetEventInstance.WaitOne(); } I want to kill mainThread.

    Read the article

  • Writing a search engine

    - by wvd
    Hello all, The title might be a bit misleading, but I couldn't figure out a better title. I'm writing a simple search engine which will search on several sites for the specific domain. To be concrete: I'm writing a search engine for hardstyle livesets/aftermovies/tracks. To do I will search on the sites who provide livesets, tracks, and such. The problem here is speed, I need to pass the search query to 5-7 sites, get the results and then use my own algorithm to display the results in a sorted order. I could just "multithread" it, but it's easier said then done so I have a few questions. What would be the best solution to this problem? Should I just multithread/process this application, so I'm going to get a bit of speed-up? Are there any other solutions or I am doing something really wrong? Thanks, William van Doorn

    Read the article

  • How to correctly stop thread which is using Control.Invoke

    - by codymanix
    I tried the following (pseudocode) but I always get a deadlock when Iam trying to stop my thread. The problem is that Join() waits for the thread to complete and a pending Invoke() operation is also waiting to complete. How can I solve this? Thread workerThread = new Thread(BackupThreadRunner); volatile bool cancel; // this is the thread worker routine void BackupThreadRunner() { while (!cancel) { DoStuff(); ReportProgress(); } } // main thread void ReportProgress() { if (InvokeRequired) { Invoke(ReportProgress); } UpdateStatusBarAndStuff(); } // main thread void DoCancel() { cancel=true; workerThread.Join(); }

    Read the article

  • Java multi-threading - what is the best way to monitor the activity of a number of threads?

    - by MalcomTucker
    I have a number of threads that are performing a long runing task. These threads themselves have child threads that do further subdivisions of work. What is the best way for me to track the following: How many total threads my process has created What the state of each thread currently is What part of my process each thread has currently got to I want to do it in as efficient a way as possible and once threads finish, I don't want any references to them hanging around becasuse I need to be freeing up memory as early as possible. Any advice?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >