multithreading

问题 I try to deploy my war file. But after success deployment. I get this log: [root@dfdfdf bin]# export JAVA_HOME="/usr/java/jdk1.8.0_112/" [root@dfdfdfdbin]# ./startup.sh Using CATALINA_BASE: /root/apache-tomcat-8.5.8 Using CATALINA_HOME: /root/apache-tomcat-8.5.8 Using CATALINA_TMPDIR: /root/apache-tomcat-8.5.8/temp Using JRE_HOME: /usr/java/jdk1.8.0_112/ Using CLASSPATH: /root/apache-tomcat-8.5.8/bin/bootstrap.jar:/root/apache-tomcat-8.5.8/bin/tomcat-juli.jar Tomcat started. [root@satubangau

问题 I'm trying to implement a tcp 'echo server'. Simple stuff: Client sends a message to the server. Server receives the message Server converts message to uppercase Server sends modified message to client Client prints the response. It worked well, so I decided to parallelize the server; make it so that it could handle multiple clients at time. Since most Python interpreters have a GIL, multithreading won't cut it. I had to use multiproces... And boy, this is where things went downhill. I'm

问题 I'm wondering how to stop an unresponsive thread in Java, such that it's really dead. First of all, I'm well aware of Thread.stop() being deprecated and why it should not be used; there are already many excellent answers on this topic, cf. [1][2]. So, the question more precisely is, whether it's actually technically possibly to kill a thread which code is not controlled by us but possibly hostile and not responding to interrupts. In the simplest case, a hostile thread would be running while

问题 I have a unit and form which uses a worker thread to query a database. After each query is executed a method is called using Synchronize to update the UI. It seems that whenever a call to the methods using Synchronize() is made, the process stops until I shake the mouse or interact with the keyboard. Below is the basics of what I am doing. This example is complete other than that I did not provide a database connection or queries for a real database- I am hoping it will be enough to see the

问题 I have a unit and form which uses a worker thread to query a database. After each query is executed a method is called using Synchronize to update the UI. It seems that whenever a call to the methods using Synchronize() is made, the process stops until I shake the mouse or interact with the keyboard. Below is the basics of what I am doing. This example is complete other than that I did not provide a database connection or queries for a real database- I am hoping it will be enough to see the

问题 After several searches, I cannot find a lock-free vector implementation. There is a document that speaks about it but nothing concrete (in any case I have not found it). http://pirkelbauer.com/papers/opodis06.pdf There are currently 2 threads dealing with arrays, there may be more in a while. One thread that updates different vectors and another thread that accesses the vector to do calculations, etc. Each thread accesses the different array a large number of times per second. I implemented a

问题 I am new to Python and I would like to create what is a 'global static variable', my thread-safe and process-safe queue, between threads/processes created in different modules. I read from the doc that the concept of a global variable is created using a third module, that I will call as cfg, which defines and initializes my global queue. I have a problem sharing the instance of this objects between my modules because I tried to print the repr () function over the shared queue imported from

问题 I am new to Python and I would like to create what is a 'global static variable', my thread-safe and process-safe queue, between threads/processes created in different modules. I read from the doc that the concept of a global variable is created using a third module, that I will call as cfg, which defines and initializes my global queue. I have a problem sharing the instance of this objects between my modules because I tried to print the repr () function over the shared queue imported from

问题 I've a question about the fairness of the critical sections on Windows, using EnterCriticalSection and LeaveCriticalSection methods. The MSDN documentation specifies: "There is no guarantee about the order in which threads will obtain ownership of the critical section, however, the system will be fair to all threads." The problem comes with an application I wrote, which blocks some threads that never enter critical section, even after a long time; so I perfomed some tests with a simple c

问题 I've a question about the fairness of the critical sections on Windows, using EnterCriticalSection and LeaveCriticalSection methods. The MSDN documentation specifies: "There is no guarantee about the order in which threads will obtain ownership of the critical section, however, the system will be fair to all threads." The problem comes with an application I wrote, which blocks some threads that never enter critical section, even after a long time; so I perfomed some tests with a simple c