Wait for method to complete?

Question

0.00/5 (No votes)

See more:

Hi, I'm just wondering if there is a better way of fixing this problem that I have. I'm sending two packets at the same time but for some reason only one client can receive both packets just fine at the same time the rest of the clients refuse to receive data. By adding the Thread.Sleep(1) it works just fine but just wanted to hear from you if there is a better way to solve it or should I keep it like this?

C#

Send(fs.GetFileCheckList(), 1);
Thread.Sleep(1);
Send(FileHashes, 0);

_buffer = new byte[1024];
client.BeginReceive(_buffer, 0, _buffer.Length, SocketFlags.None, new AsyncCallback(ReceiveCallback), client);

Posted 4-Dec-13 9:49am

maxbre

Add a Solution

1 solution

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov · Answer 1 · 2013-12-04T10:30:00

For this purpose, not only sleeping is not a "better way"; it is totally unacceptable because it causes race condition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_condition[^].

Event if it works for you, it's just a matter of chance. It is not a legitimate way of thread synchronization. Sleeping has its uses, but this is beyond this question. Forget it for now.

If you really need one thread to wait for another one, you can use the class System.Threading.ManualResetEvent, which is merely a kind of the other class with specialized constructor, System.Threading.EventWaitHandle, which you also can use with System.Threading.EventResetMode.ManualReset:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.manualresetevent%28v=vs.110%29.aspx[^],
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.eventwaithandle(v=vs.110).aspx[^].

I hope you can figure out how to use it from this MSDN documentation. When one thread calls EventWaitHandle.WaitOne, it is put to a special wait state which wastes no CPU time: the calling thread is switched off and never scheduled back to execution until it is waken up, which can be done by such conditions as abort, timeout, and, importantly, the call from other thread, which signals the same instance of EventWaitHandle with the call to EventWaitHandle.Set.

—SA