|
web
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Threading AdviceI have a web service that I believe needs to implement threading. I
have a timer setup to fire 3 requests and have them do some calculations and send the info to the mainform. I also need the click events on the mainform remain in real time. Through a little experimentation it seems that I can only use 1 sub to update the form to avoid cross threading. So maybe have the timer fire the 3 requests and then when they are complete fire the sub to update the form. Can anyone help point me in the right direction here? Timer>>>3 requests>>>sub to update mainform While keeping the mainform clicks in real time. Thanks a lot. Melton,
How many threads you think there will be active and keep than in mind that every user is running on its own thread? Are you not afraid that you will quickly reach the maximum? Cor <melt***@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht Show quoteHide quote news:1149819222.641011.42650@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >I have a web service that I believe needs to implement threading. I > have a timer setup to fire 3 requests and have them do some > calculations and send the info to the mainform. I also need the click > events on the mainform remain in real time. Through a little > experimentation it seems that I can only use 1 sub to update the form > to avoid cross threading. So maybe have the timer fire the 3 requests > and then when they are complete fire the sub to update the form. Can > anyone help point me in the right direction here? > > Timer>>>3 requests>>>sub to update mainform > While keeping the mainform clicks in real time. > > Thanks a lot. > Sorry, I think I misspoke. I am building an app on the user side to
access a webservice. I think I've figured out how to run the form separately using BeginInvoke, but I still haven't solved the requests. Is it even possible to send 3 at the same time or will it run 1 then the next etc? It takes about 500ms to recieve the response and process. So if I were able to manage to send all 3 requests at the same time then I would probably have to put a thread.sleep(600) on the ui update thread. Otherwise its going to take about 1.5 seconds to run all 3 in line. Any ideas? If I have to run them in line then I will, but I would rather try and speed this up. Melton,
Don't expect that with threading you can speed up processes which have a serial botleneck. There cannot go more water through a pipe than its through its smallest part. The same is with data. Now your process takes 1.5ms. With the threads it will take probably more just because that the throughput is interupted and that your webservice is probably handling more users in a sequential way, therefore you have introduced extra waittimes. Your smallest part is not widened up by threading. (Or you should have different independent working webservice on more locations). Just my thought, Cor <melt***@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht Show quoteHide quote news:1149966569.548618.310950@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > Sorry, I think I misspoke. I am building an app on the user side to > access a webservice. I think I've figured out how to run the form > separately using BeginInvoke, but I still haven't solved the requests. > Is it even possible to send 3 at the same time or will it run 1 then > the next etc? It takes about 500ms to recieve the response and > process. So if I were able to manage to send all 3 requests at the > same time then I would probably have to put a thread.sleep(600) on the > ui update thread. Otherwise its going to take about 1.5 seconds to run > all 3 in line. > > Any ideas? If I have to run them in line then I will, but I would > rather try and speed this up. > IMHO in a server based architecture this is not the case Cor and i believe
that is where the TS is talking about With SOA designs this is exact one of the few situations were multithreading really can give you a performance benefit regards Michel Posseth [MCP] Show quoteHide quote "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> schreef in bericht news:uqI9DVRjGHA.4508@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Melton, > > Don't expect that with threading you can speed up processes which have a > serial botleneck. > > There cannot go more water through a pipe than its through its smallest > part. > > The same is with data. Now your process takes 1.5ms. With the threads it > will take probably more just because that the throughput is interupted and > that your webservice is probably handling more users in a sequential way, > therefore you have introduced extra waittimes. > > Your smallest part is not widened up by threading. (Or you should have > different independent working webservice on more locations). > > Just my thought, > > Cor > > <melt***@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht > news:1149966569.548618.310950@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... >> Sorry, I think I misspoke. I am building an app on the user side to >> access a webservice. I think I've figured out how to run the form >> separately using BeginInvoke, but I still haven't solved the requests. >> Is it even possible to send 3 at the same time or will it run 1 then >> the next etc? It takes about 500ms to recieve the response and >> process. So if I were able to manage to send all 3 requests at the >> same time then I would probably have to put a thread.sleep(600) on the >> ui update thread. Otherwise its going to take about 1.5 seconds to run >> all 3 in line. >> >> Any ideas? If I have to run them in line then I will, but I would >> rather try and speed this up. >> > > Mischel,
Describe where I am in your opinion wrong. Suppose I want 1000 parts of data. I get this from a server over whatever line. The bottleneck is mostly the line but can be of course somewhere else Suppose I create 1000 threads to get everytime 1 piece of data. Where is than my benefit because the data has sequential to pass the smallest part of the pipeline (Can be by instance as well the processing ability (speed etc) of the Server). I know situations where it can be benefited beside what I wrote already if there are more suppliers. That is where there are supporting more connections per user but where the maximum throughput per connection is limited by a certain bandwidth. Because that stupid situation has everybody made multithreading programs for that. Therefore I assume that in those cases in future that the connections will be limited per user. As sample this is the fact by downloadaccelarators (As they are using more downloadservers than it is fine, than they fall in the category I have described in my first message). But from what was written I had not the idea that it was about such a kind of downloadaccelarator. Cor Show quoteHide quote "Michel Posseth [MCP]" <M***@posseth.com> schreef in bericht news:e1$rnGUjGHA.1320@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > > IMHO in a server based architecture this is not the case Cor and i believe > that is where the TS is talking about > > With SOA designs this is exact one of the few situations were > multithreading really can give you a performance benefit > > regards > > Michel Posseth [MCP] > > > > > > "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> schreef in bericht > news:uqI9DVRjGHA.4508@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> Melton, >> >> Don't expect that with threading you can speed up processes which have a >> serial botleneck. >> >> There cannot go more water through a pipe than its through its smallest >> part. >> >> The same is with data. Now your process takes 1.5ms. With the threads it >> will take probably more just because that the throughput is interupted >> and that your webservice is probably handling more users in a sequential >> way, therefore you have introduced extra waittimes. >> >> Your smallest part is not widened up by threading. (Or you should have >> different independent working webservice on more locations). >> >> Just my thought, >> >> Cor >> >> <melt***@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht >> news:1149966569.548618.310950@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... >>> Sorry, I think I misspoke. I am building an app on the user side to >>> access a webservice. I think I've figured out how to run the form >>> separately using BeginInvoke, but I still haven't solved the requests. >>> Is it even possible to send 3 at the same time or will it run 1 then >>> the next etc? It takes about 500ms to recieve the response and >>> process. So if I were able to manage to send all 3 requests at the >>> same time then I would probably have to put a thread.sleep(600) on the >>> ui update thread. Otherwise its going to take about 1.5 seconds to run >>> all 3 in line. >>> >>> Any ideas? If I have to run them in line then I will, but I would >>> rather try and speed this up. >>> >> >> > > Well in your described situation it is indeed foolish to use multithreading
( if it is only about static data retrieval ) However what if the business logic is on the server ? ( as it is more and more the case nowadays , thanks to webservices , remoting and COM+ architecture ) Instead of waiting for a transaction to finish you could already send or process another piece of information even better a "Good" programmer starts the longest running task first and then starts all subsequent tasks in order of longest running time in a ideal situation the total processing time on the client is now the time of the longest running process while in a single threaded architecture the total processing time is at least the sum of all tasks. But indeed "most" people use multithreading / asynchronous processing in a bad way and forget that one person running 100 meters is almost ever faster as 10 persons running 10 meters , but as i said in some situations the opposite is true let say we talk now about 50.000 meters who is now faster ?? ( unless he comes from Kenia or Ethiopia :-) . So in the end it all comes down in rightly defining the solution`s architecture regards Michel Posseth [MCP] Show quoteHide quote "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> schreef in bericht news:%23KxLRgUjGHA.4056@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Mischel, > > Describe where I am in your opinion wrong. > > Suppose I want 1000 parts of data. > I get this from a server over whatever line. > The bottleneck is mostly the line but can be of course somewhere else > Suppose I create 1000 threads to get everytime 1 piece of data. > > Where is than my benefit because the data has sequential to pass the > smallest part of the pipeline (Can be by instance as well the processing > ability (speed etc) of the Server). > > I know situations where it can be benefited beside what I wrote already if > there are more suppliers. > > That is where there are supporting more connections per user but where the > maximum throughput per connection is limited by a certain bandwidth. > Because that stupid situation has everybody made multithreading programs > for that. Therefore I assume that in those cases in future that the > connections will be limited per user. As sample this is the fact by > downloadaccelarators (As they are using more downloadservers than it is > fine, than they fall in the category I have described in my first > message). > > But from what was written I had not the idea that it was about such a kind > of downloadaccelarator. > > Cor > > > "Michel Posseth [MCP]" <M***@posseth.com> schreef in bericht > news:e1$rnGUjGHA.1320@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> >> IMHO in a server based architecture this is not the case Cor and i >> believe that is where the TS is talking about >> >> With SOA designs this is exact one of the few situations were >> multithreading really can give you a performance benefit >> >> regards >> >> Michel Posseth [MCP] >> >> >> >> >> >> "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> schreef in bericht >> news:uqI9DVRjGHA.4508@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> Melton, >>> >>> Don't expect that with threading you can speed up processes which have a >>> serial botleneck. >>> >>> There cannot go more water through a pipe than its through its smallest >>> part. >>> >>> The same is with data. Now your process takes 1.5ms. With the threads it >>> will take probably more just because that the throughput is interupted >>> and that your webservice is probably handling more users in a sequential >>> way, therefore you have introduced extra waittimes. >>> >>> Your smallest part is not widened up by threading. (Or you should have >>> different independent working webservice on more locations). >>> >>> Just my thought, >>> >>> Cor >>> >>> <melt***@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht >>> news:1149966569.548618.310950@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... >>>> Sorry, I think I misspoke. I am building an app on the user side to >>>> access a webservice. I think I've figured out how to run the form >>>> separately using BeginInvoke, but I still haven't solved the requests. >>>> Is it even possible to send 3 at the same time or will it run 1 then >>>> the next etc? It takes about 500ms to recieve the response and >>>> process. So if I were able to manage to send all 3 requests at the >>>> same time then I would probably have to put a thread.sleep(600) on the >>>> ui update thread. Otherwise its going to take about 1.5 seconds to run >>>> all 3 in line. >>>> >>>> Any ideas? If I have to run them in line then I will, but I would >>>> rather try and speed this up. >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > A webservice is multithreaded by design , this is taken care of by the
hosting process ( IIS ) i.ow if you multithread your client app and call a service 3 times call 2 might be sooner finished as call 1 ( or it might not ) if this is not a problem for you , you might encapsulate your calls in a class with an id to track wich call is fired and returned about the UI update thingy read the invokerequired property of the control you want to update if it is true you need to recall the updating procedure with a delegate to synchronize the thread regards Michel Posseth [MCP] <melt***@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht Show quoteHide quote news:1149819222.641011.42650@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >I have a web service that I believe needs to implement threading. I > have a timer setup to fire 3 requests and have them do some > calculations and send the info to the mainform. I also need the click > events on the mainform remain in real time. Through a little > experimentation it seems that I can only use 1 sub to update the form > to avoid cross threading. So maybe have the timer fire the 3 requests > and then when they are complete fire the sub to update the form. Can > anyone help point me in the right direction here? > > Timer>>>3 requests>>>sub to update mainform > While keeping the mainform clicks in real time. > > Thanks a lot. > 
Other interesting topics
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
