|
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES ...........
Thank You Eddy...VERY Much...I'd be too embarrassed to tell you how much time I spent of this yesterday. The following is the actual code that I extracted from your sample to resolve this:
foreach (var element in checkedListBoxServices.CheckedItems)
{
textBox1.Text += ((string)element) + Environment.NewLine;
}
It seems that your use of the new context (var) replacing my use of string and then casting for the result later with (string) makes a big difference ... I need to look at this again to really understand it, but I know that I can thanks to you. Much appreciation and thanks...Best Regards, Pat
ps: after searching for this yesterday, and finding 'solutions' that were a page long and STILL did not work, I am sure that hundreds of others will be wanting the thank you as well for a concise usable solution...  Pat
|
|
|
|
|
You're welcome 
|
|
|
|
|
Hi at all & tks in advance.
I wrote a class for manage backdata (data,error and so on) from a wcf which expose several and different function.
The scope is to make a same frame for back data.
This class are like this:
[DataContract(Name = "WS Back Data Frame",IsReference = true)]
[System.Serializable()]
public class WSBackDataFrame <C> where C : class
{
[DataMember]
public List<C> DataCollection;
[DataMember]
public bool IsOk
{
get { return this.FaultType == AppFaultType.NoFailure; }
private set { }
}
...
....
}
Now i declare exposed methods like this:
public WSBackDataFrame <Class_1> (....);
public WSBackDataFrame <Class_2> (....);
...
...
but i recived error for duplicated reference for WSBackDataFrame...
I've done a porting from WebServices to WCF ... in WebServices when i published the system created 2 different classes like
WSBackDataFrameofClass_1
WSBackDataFrameofClass_1
What is wrong in declaration?? What WCF expects?
tks and sorry for my bad english
|
|
|
|
|
anymalo wrote: but i recived error for duplicated reference for WSBackDataFrame...
During compilation? Sounds like you added the same class more than once, and that would confuse the compiler. Try renaming your class; if it works after that, you've got a copy of the class "somewhere" in your code.
anymalo wrote: WSBackDataFrameofClass_1
WSBackDataFrameofClass_1
When you mention "WSBackDataFrameofClass_1" in code, how would the compiler know which of those two classes you meant? Put them in a separate namespace to make them unique, or change on of the names.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: During compilation? Sounds like you added the same class more than once, and that would confuse the compiler. Try renaming your class; if it works after that, you've got a copy of the class "somewhere" in your code.
No, i have not specified.
The error appear on execution of wcf 
Eddy Vluggen wrote: When you mention "WSBackDataFrameofClass_1" in code, how would the compiler know which of those two classes you meant? Put them in a separate namespace to make them unique, or change on of the names.
The reference file created by WBServices export this definition of those classes but in a prevoius prj that are not wcf(and it work!!!!).
I specified this only because i though wcf will be same behaviour...
modified 20-Mar-13 9:17am.
|
|
|
|
|
anymalo wrote: The reference file created by WBServices export this definition of those classes but in a prevoius prj that are not wcf(and it work!!!!).
Same problem; two classes with the samen namespace/classname in a single project will fail.
Also, the client would need a reference to the assembly containing the WBServices.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I have a very simple WCF service, :
<br />
[service contract]<br />
<br />
public class Service1 : IService1<br />
{<br />
<br />
List<int> m_list = new List<int>();<br />
<br />
public Service1()<br />
{<br />
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)<br />
{<br />
m_list.Add(i);<br />
}<br />
}<br />
<br />
<br />
[OperationContract]<br />
public string GetData(int value)<br />
{<br />
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++)<br />
{<br />
Thread t = new Thread(() => simpleThread(i));<br />
t.Start();<br />
}<br />
return "text";
}<br />
<br />
void simpleThread(int i_in) <br />
{<br />
Trace.WriteLine(m_list[i_in].ToString());<br />
}<br />
<br />
}<br />
The code stores 0,1,2,3 as values inside m_list. So m_list[0] is 0, [1] is 1 .. [3] is 3.
And when we print it through "SimpleThread(int i)" Thread function, In the log it's supposed to be 0,1,2,3 but it's always like 2,2,3 or something weird. And the index passed in itself is wrong. It never passes 0,1. And sometimes it prints...
4 : 4
4 : 4
4 : 4
4 : 4
And the problem is random. I'm missing something very fundamental with threading on WCF. Any help please?
I would like to get it :
0 : 0
1 : 1
2 : 2
3 : 3
modified 20-Mar-13 3:24am.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
This is because environment is multithreaded. You need to add one more statement to let first thread complete and process on another. This is because you need your process in sequence.
Use
t.Join() to let first thread complete before second starts in your GetData function.
Thanks
-Amit Gajjar (MinterProject)
|
|
|
|
|
well, I don't think that's the reason because the reason for using threads here is _not_ to let it wait for the next call. Otherwise I would have made a simple for loop without threads right?
The loop is running too fast, before the thread function could pick up the variable's value.
If I put a Thread.Sleep(100) after each call, the sequence comes in the right order.
Just as a POC , try this on a C# console Application, it would put them in right order. As simple as that!
But I sense WCF requires something else, to persist the value of the passed variable. But No search helps.
|
|
|
|
|
There is difference between normal loop and using thread.
if you are using normal loop your application will hang till your loop completed. while in thread other thread will run and your application will not hang.
Thanks
-Amit Gajjar (MinterProject)
|
|
|
|
|
Yup, but still Thread.Join wouldn't let the control go past the function scope. It makes it wait there until the threads complete their execution. In short, it "BLOCKS" too.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes ofcourse it will block that thread execution. but it will not block others. let me know if that works for you.
As you have mention earlier you are using thread.sleep but why you need it ?
Thanks
-Amit Gajjar (MinterProject)
|
|
|
|
|
I removed it, I just tried "Sleep"ing to check if it's a Sync issue. Sleep helped to print the index in order, but misses the whole point of using threads. - need to run fast. And Sleep is just for debugging. never a solution, unless the BugFix-Priority-Column says "Fix Right NoW". 
|
|
|
|
|
For your knowledge, Thread is used when you do not want any task in sequence. if you need some task to be in sequence you need to use single threaded function. if you are doing thread.join() it will not degrade performance of your application, although it will impact on your current thread. at that time other thread will keep executing. First you need to decide if your current process is not meant to execute in sequence then you can defiantly use thread. hope this makes sense.
Thanks
-Amit Gajjar (MinterProject)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm quite reluctant to believe you're getting any kind of result at all as your code wouldn't even compile:
[OperationContract]
public string GetData(int value)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
Thread t = new Thread(() => simpleThread(i));
t.Start();
}
}
Compilation would fail because of the missing return statement.
Regards,
— Manfred
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
|
While rummaging around in my brain a bit I suddenly had a case of deja vu.
The problem lies here in closures, lambda expressions and their interaction with threading.
I'm not sure if I found the post I read a couple of years ago, but here it goes:
Lambda expressions, captured variables and threading[^].
Especially enlightening is answer 2.
Thus please try to rewrite your code in this manner:
[OperationContract]
public string GetData(int value)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
Thread t = new Thread(() => {
int j = i;
simpleThread(j);
});
t.Start();
}
return "";
}
Regards,
— Manfred
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your efforts, but it still didn't work Mr.Manfred
This produced a debug out like:
3 : 3
3 : 3
3 : 3
4 : 4
I tried Parameterized Thread start:
ParameterizedThreadStart pt = new System.Threading.ParameterizedThreadStart(simpleThread);
Thread t = new System.Threading.Thread(pt);
t.Start(i);
It produces:
0 : 0
2 : 2
3 : 3
1 : 1
It covered all the indexes, but still it's not in the right order. May be we can't expect this in the right order? as they are "Threads!"?
|
|
|
|
|
VKAnanth wrote: May be we can't expect this in the right order? as they are "Threads!"?
You hit it spot on. Threads are scheduled by the system when to run and for how long. So what you are observing now is the expected behaviour, eventhough there might be circumstances where the order would be what you presumed first .
Did you also try the third alternative from the SO post I referenced in my solution attempt?
Regards,
— ManfredPS: Skip the Mr. stuff, we're all peers here on CP.
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just letting the monkey go off my head at the moment as the code works with the ParametereizedThread start. Packing the code and sending it to my mates.
Once done, will come back to explore the method that you pointed out. cheers! Mr. Manfred ![Java | [Coffee]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Threading is not deterministic in the order of execution unless you add constructs to synchronize your threads, e.g. Thread 2 waits for completion of Thread 1 before it starts, Thread 3 waits for completion of Thread 2 before it starts, etc. But that would defeat the purpose of threading, if you create threads to allow parallel execution, but then you serialize all of their execution.
(On a multi-core machine, they can even be scheduled to execute physically at the same time, which opens up a can of even more indeterministic behavior )
|
|
|
|
|
If you don't want to execute this sequence on the current thread but still in the same order you could try to just execute the whole loop in another thread.
Change:
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
Thread t = new Thread(() => simpleThread(i));
t.Start();
}
to:
Thread t = new Thread(() => {
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
simpleThread(i);
}
});
t.Start();
This would process all items in the right order while still running in another (not blocking) thread.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is the lambda expression, it references the variable i of the outer method at the time of the thread execution, and that is likely after all threads are created. This is not like a passed parameter that gets copied at the time of the thread creation.
Try creating a thread that takes a parameter and pass the i there, this should resolve the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VKAnanth wrote: And the problem is random
Ast stated elsewhere...
No the problem is that you are using threads and you think that there should be an order.
It is simple - stopping thinking that. There is no order. It doesn't matter how you create them nor execute them - there still is no order.
If you want an order then you must assert that order yourself into the code.
HOW you do that depends on what you actually want to acheive. It could be as simple as just ordering the final set after processing of all the threads completes. Or providing a bucket into which each thread puts its result.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
