Ben Clewett
Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:27:07 -0700
Dr Hipp, I am just playing devils advocate here because I have completed much Java programming in a multi-threaded application. :) I understand the problems of multi-threading. I am reminded that it took nearly 20 years of development to get multi-processor support in a modern OS stable. Much success for this can be attributed to Semaphore Flags. With CPU hardware support to ensure that the semaphore it's self cannot be controlled by more than one process. Multi-thread applications suffer the same problems. Without semaphore flags or 20 years of development. A novice programmer can happily create a second thread and quickly create terribly applications. However the need for multi-threads is compelling. Especially in a GUI environment. For instance a Mail reader. Where one thread is needed to ensure the GUI is drawn correctly and respond to GUI events. Another to download and dispatch mail. (My Thunderbird has 10 threads. This may be a bit of overkill :) As another user also mentioned, a Windows system works better with few processes with many threads. I believe the issue is not whether to use threads, but to use them correctly. Which is not a hard thing to do with a little support. This is where Java (and .NET) work well. If you use them correctly. They provide thread-safe objects. Which have been designed to use semaphore flags internally. If the programmer uses these thread-safe objects correctly, they will not encounter thread issues. For instance, all communication between threads should be exclusively through these thread-safe objects. Further, Java and .NET provide Sycronisation methods. The defining of a method to be synchronised automatically creates the locks to ensure thread safe access. I am also interested in your comments on Pointers and GoTo. I note that Java is 100% pointers. Apart from basic types, all object access is by pointer. Using Exceptions correctly, I have never felt the need for a GoTo. Exceptions do the same as GoTo, accept, maybe, in a slightly more developed and useful way. These are just my opinions :) Regards, Ben Clewett. D. Richard Hipp wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 16:41 +0530, Roushan Ali wrote:Hello all, Can we use single sqlite_open handle(global) across threads( if all database operations are serialized by using semaphore) ? Please help.Opening a database connection in one thread and using it in anotherwill work on some operating systems but not on others. You are advised not to do it. See http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/tktview?tn=1272and http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/chngview?cn=2521. Actually, this seems like a good opportunity to repeat my oft-ignored advice to not use more than one thread in a single address space. If you need multiple threads, create multiple processes. This has nothing to do with SQLite = it is just good programming advice. I have worked on countless multi-threaded programs over the years, and I have yet to see a single one that didn't contain subtle, hard to reproduce, and very hard to troubleshoot bugs related to threading issues.I am constantly amazed at the prevailing idea (exemplified by Java) that software should be strongly typed and shouldnot use goto statement or pointers - all in the name of reducing bugs - but that it is OK to use multiple threadswithin the same address space. Strong typing helps prevent only bugs that are trivially easy to locate and fix. The use of goto statements and pointers likewise results in deterministic problems that are easy to test for and relatively easy to track down and correct. But threadingbugs tend to manifest themselves as timing-dependent glitches and lock-ups that are hardware and platform dependent, that never happen the same way twice, and thatonly appear for customers after deployment and never in a testing environment.