synchronization

Normally in applications (Take web application for example) we have a single instance of the logger created during the startup. It can even be a singleton and it doesn't matter. The important thing is there is 1 instance for the whole application. We use java.util.logger Now image you have two requests from two different users which throw an exception and we are logging those which get written to the log file. Is the write in these two different requests to the log file synchronized in someway? Or do we need to explicitly synchronize them cause I found in rare cases we got logs which are all

Closed. This question is off-topic . It is not currently accepting answers. Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow. Closed 4 years ago . I am working on an iPhone app. How to sync new events with iOS Calendar? user755278 You can go-through this github code this will really help you if you want to syn with events in calander of you app... https://github.com/klazuka/Kal Hope this will solve your problem... Another one:- For implementing the calander and for synchronization with data of calander you have to implement the calander by adding the Event

When I run the following code in from Python's multiprocessing module page : from multiprocessing import Process, Lock def f(l, i): l.acquire() print 'hello world', i l.release() if __name__ == '__main__': lock = Lock() for num in range(10): Process(target=f, args=(lock, num)).start() Sometimes I get unordered output such as: hello world 0 hello world 1 hello world 2 hello world 4 hello world 3 hello world 6 hello world 5 hello world 7 hello world 8 hello world 9 Note that 4 is printed before 3 and 6 is printed before 5. Why? Because the whole point of multiprocessing is parallelism . Your

We are some Devs working on an internal TFS-Repository. This TFS can only be accessed from within out network. But we also have a test-lab which wasn't meant to, but ended up in being a development environment. Because we do not have any access to our company's TFS we used Microsofts tfs (visualstudio.com) instead. We do not have the chance to change ANYTHING in our network-structure. So stuff like "just allow your test-machines to access your internal TFS would be of no help) Some of our DEV-Machines can access both TFSs (internal and visualstudio.com) and some can only connect to the

rephrased for clarity I would like to be able to mix the use of the synchronized block with more explicit locking via calling lock and release methods directly when appropriate. Thus allowing me the syntaxtical sugar of using sychtronized(myObject) when I can get away with it, but also being able to call myObject.lock & myObject.unlock dierctly for those times when a synchronized block is not flexible enough to do what I need done. I know that every single Object has, implicitly, a rentrant lock built into it which is used by the synchronized block. Effectively the the lock mthod is caled on

I am running into the issue of what to do when a user does a delete, for example, while offline? I was considering using an addedQueue, modifiedQueue, and deletedQueue, and persisting them using NSCoding and NSKeyedArchiver . Maybe I would use a Set or a Dictionary. Then I would iterate over them in the background or once every app launch, and remove from them on success. Does that sound reasonable? Does anyone have experience with this problem they can share? I've done quite a bit of searching for answers, including watching all the CloudKit WWDC talks. I am storing all of my data locally