🚀 go-pugleaf

Thank you for your very valuable postings.
Is there any limit with the number of events, semaphores created in
WindowsXP ?

"Bob Gonder" <notbg@notmindspring.invalid> wrote in message
news:oocth0hsru2ohfnmsd0br2t7uqd2n3m0il@4ax.com...
> Bob Gonder wrote:
>
> >GlobalButtonclickEvent is manual reset type.
> >ThreadEvent is semaphore type.
> >Buttonclick posts PulseEvent() to GlobalButtonclickEvent.
> >Thread0 in each app is waiting for GlobalButtonclickEvent.
> >Each Thread0 posts a ReleaseSemaphore() of 3, starting 3 worker
> >threads.
> >That would take care of how many to run. Now, how do you make sure
> >that each thread runs the same number of times? (that the faster
> >thread doesn't steal a cycle from a slower one).
> >Each thread could have a counter.
> >Thread0 keeps a count of how many times it has released 3 threads.
> >If WorkerThread1 wakes up and sees that it's counter >= Thread0
> >counter, then it posts a ReleaseSemaphore() of 1 (to make up for
> >snagging one by mistake), sleeps a bit, the waits again.
> >How big should the counter be? how many times is this cycle going to
> >occur? There are other more involved methods to ensure counter doesn't
> >overflow. But if this is a manual operation, the billion or so clicks
> >supported by a long count should suffice.
>
> With that in mind, a simpler method:
> Still 4 threads, One CounterThread, Three WorkerThreads.
>
> All threads wait for ManualReset type Event.
>
> OnClick() sends PulseEvent.
>
> CounterThread adds 1 to GlobalCount. the goes back and waits for
> another event.
>
> WorkerThreads, if not already running, start running when Event comes.
> WorkerThreads check GlobalCount against their own count, and recycle
> if not equal. Otherwise, they wait.
>
> unsigned long GlobalCount=0;
> CounterThread()
> {
> while( !Terminated)
> { WaitForObject()
> ++GlobalCount;
> };
> }
> WorkerThread()
> { unsigned long Count=0;
> while( !Terminated)
> { if( GlobalCount==Count )
> WaitForObject()
> ++Count;
> Sleep(rand());
> };
> }
>
> CounterThread, being so short, should catch every Pulse.
> If WorkerThreads miss the Pulse, they should still see a difference in
> Count and run again.  There is a small race condition though.  If the
> Pulse comes After the WorkerThread checks Count, and Before WaitFor is
> processed, then it could miss it. But, it will make up for it the next
> time.
>
>