synchronization

why wait/notify/notifyAll methods are not synchronized in java ?

北城以北 提交于 2019-11-30 05:50:52
问题 in Java whenever we need to call wait/notify/notifyAll, we need to have access to object monitor (either through synchronized method or through synchronized block). So my question is why java didn't go for synchronized wait/notify methods removing the restriction of calling these methods from synchronized block or methods. In case these are declared as synchronized, it would have automatically taken the monitor access. 回答1: For notify and notifyAll, the problem with your idea is that when you

Synchronized Block within Synchronized Method

依然范特西╮ 提交于 2019-11-30 05:34:02
问题 I'm looking at some code in a third party library that contains a synchronized method, and within this method there is a synchronized block that locks on an instance variable. It's similar to this: public class Foo { final Bar bar = new Bar(); public synchronized void doSomething() { // do something synchronized(bar) { // update bar } } ... } Does this make sense? If so, what benefits are there to having a synchronized statement within a synchronized method? Given that a synchronized method

Waiting win32 threads

…衆ロ難τιáo~ 提交于 2019-11-30 05:31:53
I have a totally thread-safe FIFO structure( TaskList ) to store task classes, multiple number of threads, some of which creates and stores task and the others processes the tasks. TaskList class has a pop_front() method which returns the first task if there is at least one. Otherwise it returns NULL . Here is an example of processing function: TaskList tlist; unsigned _stdcall ThreadFunction(void * qwe) { Task * task; while(!WorkIsOver) // a global bool to end all threads. { while(task = tlist.pop_front()) { // process Task } } return 0; } My problem is, sometimes, there is no new task in the

Emacs: Often switching between Emacs and my IDE's editor, how to automatically 'synch' the files?

北城余情 提交于 2019-11-30 05:11:24
I very often need to do some Emacs magic on some files and I need to go back and forth between my IDE (IntelliJ IDEA) and Emacs. When a change is made under Emacs (and after I've saved the file) and I go back to IntelliJ the change appears immediately (if I recall correctly I configured IntelliJ to "always reload file when a modification is detected on disk" or something like that). I don't even need to reload: as soon as IntelliJ IDEA gains focus, it instantly reloads the file (and I hence have immediately access to the modifications I made from Emacs). So far, so very good. However "the

Wait() / notify() synchronization

不羁岁月 提交于 2019-11-30 05:09:45
I'm trying to check how wait/notify works in java. Code: public class Tester { public static void main(String[] args) { MyRunnable r = new MyRunnable(); Thread t = new Thread(r); t.start(); synchronized (t) { try { System.out.println("wating for t to complete"); t.wait(); System.out.println("wait over"); } catch (InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } } class MyRunnable implements Runnable { public void run() { System.out.println("entering run method"); synchronized (this) { System.out.println("entering syncronised block"); notify(); try { Thread.currentThread().sleep(1000); }

Do I need to Dispose() or Close() an EventWaitHandle?

早过忘川 提交于 2019-11-30 04:44:30
If I am using EventWaitHandle (or AutoResetEvent , ManualResetEvent ) to synchronise between threads then do I need to call the Close() or Dispose() methods on that event handle when I am done with it? EventWaitHandle inherits from WaitHandle , which implements IDisposable . And FxCop complains if I don't implement IDisposable on any class that contains an EventWaitHandle . So this suggests that I do need to call it. However none of these MSDN usage examples call Dispose() or Close() : http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.eventwaithandle(VS.80).aspx http://msdn.microsoft

Synchronizing code with two subversion repositories

你。 提交于 2019-11-30 04:13:54
A bit of background first: I am using "base" code from a remote SVN repository, not under my control. The code is not tagged (yet), so I always need to keep up with the trunk. For a number of reasons (the most important being that our local extensions to the code are of a "niche" nature, and intended to solve a specific problem with the project in which the code is used) I can't use the remote repository to do version control of any modifications I make locally. I have a local SVN repository in which I am currently doing the "local" versioning. The problem I'm faced with: I can't figure out if

Synchronize write access to Volatile field (Cheap read-write block)

☆樱花仙子☆ 提交于 2019-11-30 04:13:44
问题 Let's say I have the following class that will be read heavily, but only written to occasionally. It will be used in a multi-threaded web app, so it needs to be thread safe: public class Foo { private volatile String foo; public String getFoo() { return foo; } public synchronized String setFoo(String in) { this.foo = in; } } Java Concurrency (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp06197/index.html) states that this is a fragile way to protect write access while improving read

how to sync sqlite to Mysql

核能气质少年 提交于 2019-11-30 04:08:39
问题 HI everybody, i have a question if i have a computer run sqlite , and i want to make sqlite sync Mysql server in the external network. If the data in the sqlite have been (changed/ modified), how can I sync my MYSQL DB and sqlite so that the data in sqlite will be (changed/ modified) when the data in MYSQL DB is changed/ modified? thanks all. 回答1: You can try greplicator geplicator is a real-time solution designed to replicate data from MySQL database to any other relational database, such as

concurrent writing to the same file using threads and processes

时光毁灭记忆、已成空白 提交于 2019-11-30 03:41:21
问题 what is the correct solution to be sure that file will never be corrupted while using many threads and processes. version for threads, which care about opening errors. lock = threading.RLock() with lock: try: f = open(file, 'a') try: f.write('sth') finally: f.close() # try close in any circumstances if open passed except: pass # when open failed for processes I guess must use multiprocessing.Lock but if I want 2 processes, and the first process own 2 threads (each one use file) there is just