Hi All,
Can I use Sleep() in a thread to give up cpu time to other threads running
at the same time, so as to adjust the relative niceness of a group of
workers working on the same subject (in which each thread take part of the
whole task).
Thanks!
Xiangrong
2015-02-25 22:47 GMT+08:00 Dmitry Boyarintsev skalogryz.li...@gmail.com:
I presume most of the systems would make the sleeping thread to yield the
execution time for other threads.
The questionable behavior might occur in case of sleep(0); (should it
yield the remaining time or just return
2015-02-25 23:16 GMT+08:00 hinsta...@yandex.ru:
not sure if this helps, but:
for example, if you want thread T to run using approx. 70% of max.
available capacity, try this:
repeat
T.Resume;
Sleep(70);
T.Resume;
Sleep(30);
until ...
This seems not what I want. I would like to
not sure if this helps, but:
for example, if you want thread T to run using approx. 70% of max. available
capacity, try this:
repeat
T.Resume;
Sleep(70);
T.Resume;
Sleep(30);
until ...
so T runs for 70 ms, then sleeps for 30 ms, etc
25.02.2015, 18:06, Xiangrong Fang xrf...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 06:17:17PM +0300, hinsta...@yandex.ru wrote:
I mean T.Suspend, so u resume it then suspend it
TThread.Suspend and TThread.Resume are deprecated (since 2.4.4), don't
use them.
Henry
___
fpc-pascal maillist -
On 02/25/2015 03:41 PM, Xiangrong Fang wrote:
Can I use Sleep() in a thread to give up cpu time to other threads
running at the same time
AFAIK:
Sleep(n) makes the thread give up CPU for _at_least_ n milliseconds
Sleep(0) makes it give up it's current time slice and is due to be
I presume most of the systems would make the sleeping thread to yield the
execution time for other threads.
The questionable behavior might occur in case of sleep(0); (should it
yield the remaining time or just return immediately - up to the OS).
And multi-cpu might also do something different.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:41:58PM +0800, Xiangrong Fang wrote:
Hi All,
Can I use Sleep() in a thread to give up cpu time to other threads running
at the same time, so as to adjust the relative niceness of a group of
workers working on the same subject (in which each thread take part of the
I mean T.Suspend, so u resume it then suspend it
25.02.2015, 18:16, hinsta...@yandex.ru hinsta...@yandex.ru:
not sure if this helps, but:
for example, if you want thread T to run using approx. 70% of max. available
capacity, try this:
repeat
T.Resume;
Sleep(70);
T.Resume;
synchronising tools do not do what you want?
De: fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org
fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org em nome de Xiangrong Fang
xrf...@gmail.com
Enviado: quarta-feira, 25 de fevereiro de 2015 12:33
Para: FPC-Pascal users discussions
Hello.
You may use RTLEvents to pause a thread. =
Program Project1;
{$mode objfpc}{$H+}
uses
{$IFDEF UNIX}
cthreads,
{$ENDIF}
Classes;
Type
{ THelloThread }
THelloThread = class(TThread)
fSleepTime,fThreadNum:integer;
fEvent:PRTLEvent;
procedure Execute; override;
On 02/25/2015 10:16 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
But the only state in it is the self of the method to be synchronized. But
that can be enough (as Sven said)
Hadn't occured to me since I'm synchronizing msgs to a certain controller
context though (my invoke has a parameter controller and is
In our previous episode, Michael Schnell said:
Exactly. Interface delegation solves this problem, that is why it was
invented.
How does this correspond to the fact that (AFAIK) interfaces are
auto-creating, reference-counted and auto-destroying, while classes are
not ?
Ore is this
On 02/25/2015 10:40 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
They are not autocreating.
???
I seem to remember that I once did a test implementing an arithmetic
with interfaces and there was no need to call create. Maybe I am fooled
by my old brain.
-Michael
On 02/25/2015 10:40 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
Strictly speaking it is possible to have interfaces to some external
entity that does not map to the own class type.
I suppose this is why Borland once invented them: not for the purpose
suggested in the Blog, but to mirror some external
On 02/24/2015 05:17 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
Internally Closures are implemented as a class implementing an
interface that provides an Invoke method.
Great !
-Michael
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
On 02/24/2015 04:38 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Michael Schnell said:
On this behalf, Application.QueuAsyncCall is more versatile.
But it's easy with TThread.Queue, as well.
- define a class (not to be derived from TThread) that holds the data
to be transferred
In our previous episode, Michael Schnell said:
will make the instance remoce itself.
You need a full queue for that, since the mainthread might not run till the
thread next queue()'s.
The fpc RTL does implement a full blown queue for managing TThread.Queue
and TThread.Synchronize.
But
On 02/24/2015 09:55 PM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Exactly. Interface delegation solves this problem, that is why it was
invented.
How does this correspond to the fact that (AFAIK) interfaces are
auto-creating, reference-counted and auto-destroying, while classes are
not ?
Ore is this
19 matches
Mail list logo
