Hi Peter,

First, you do know the ThreadPool?

Its QueueUserWorkItem can let you do some work without the need of
creating or deleting threads on your own.

Second, I cannot replay what you are seeing, when I create the threads
and start them I see the threadcount increasing in taskman, aborting
them or just let them finish, decreases the threadcount... (Though I
tested it with 2.0, i cant imaging something fundamental as threading
has changed from 1.1 to 2.0...)

Why is there a need to abort your threads? You say you are waiting for
an event, can you let them wait for an "abort" event, and when that
event occurs the thread just exits its runloop, which will destroy the
thread by it own.

HTH
// Ryan

On 9/5/06, peter lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dear all,
  I create a thread and call its start  method, after some times pass, I
make it wait for a event and block itself, then I call
thread's abort method.  I found my thread count(viewed by process explorer)
is still the number before I call abort.
I search it from lots of donet books. The only way I can do is calling abort
or call a flag and blah...
My situation is like as follows.

I have a multithread application using dotnet 1.1.One of the threads hang I
don't when it will cause this problem.
So I guess I need to write a monitor thread to monitor all the threads. Once
thread hang, I can call the thread's abort function and recreate a thread
with the same properties
to do its job. I found the thread count increasing . I just  don't  know
why  the thread count  not decrease when the monitor call the thread's abort
function?
Could someone tell me how to do this?

Best regards Peter

===================================
This list is hosted by DevelopMentor(r)  http://www.develop.com

View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com


===================================
This list is hosted by DevelopMentorĀ®  http://www.develop.com

View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com

Reply via email to