Multithreading and parallel processes with c++ - c++

I would like to create a c++ webserver that will perform a task for each user that lands on my website. Since the task might be computationally heavy (for now just a long sleep), I'd like to handle each user on a different thread. I'm using mongoose to set up a webserver.
The different processes (in my code below just one, aka server1) are set up correctly and seem to function correctly. However, the threads seem to be queuing one after the other so if 2 users hit the end point, the second user must wait until the first user finishes. What am I missing? Do the threads run out of scope? Is there a "thread-manager" that I should be using?
#include "../../mongoose.h"
#include <unistd.h>
#include <iostream>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <thread>
//what happens whenever someone lands on an endpoint
void myEvent(struct mg_connection *conn){
//long delay...
std::thread mythread(usleep, 2*5000000);
mythread.join();
mg_send_header(conn, "Content-Type", "text/plain");
mg_printf_data(conn, "This is a reply from server instance # %s",
(char *) conn->server_param);
}
static int ev_handler(struct mg_connection *conn, enum mg_event ev) {
if (ev == MG_REQUEST) {
myEvent(conn);
return MG_TRUE;
} else if (ev == MG_AUTH) {
return MG_TRUE;
} else {
return MG_FALSE;
}
}
static void *serve(void *server) {
for (;;) mg_poll_server((struct mg_server *) server, 1000);
return NULL;
}
int main(void) {
struct mg_server *server1;
server1 = mg_create_server((void *) "1", ev_handler);
mg_set_option(server1, "listening_port", "8080");
mg_start_thread(serve, server1);
getchar();
return 0;
}

Long running requests should be handled like this:
static void thread_func(struct mg_connection *conn) {
sleep(60); // simulate long processing
conn->user_data = "done"; // Production code must not do that.
// Other thread must never access connection
// structure directly. This example is just
// for demonstration.
}
static int ev_handler(struct mg_connection *conn, enum mg_event ev) {
switch (ev) {
case MG_REQUEST:
conn->user_data = "doing...";
spawn_thread(thread_func, conn);
return MG_MORE; // Important! Signal Mongoose we are not done yet
case MG_POLL:
if (conn->user_data != NULL && !strcmp(conn->user_data, "done")) {
mg_printf(conn, "HTTP/1.0 200 OK\n\n Done !");
return MG_TRUE; // Signal we're finished. Mongoose can close this connection
}
return MG_FALSE; // Still not done

Caveat: I'm not familiar with mongoose
My assumptions:
The serve function is polling for incoming connections
If the thread executing mg_poll_server is the same thread that triggers the call to ev_handler then your problem is the fact that ev_handler calls myEvent which starts a long running operation and blocks the thread (i.e., by calling join). In this case you're also blocking the thread which is handling the incoming connections (i.e., A subsequent client must wait for the first client to finish their work), which seems is the behavior you describe seeing.
I'm not sure what the real task is supposed to do so I can't say for sure how you should fix this. Perhaps in your use-case it may be possible to call detach otherwise you might keep track of executing threads and defer calling join on them until the server is shutdown.

James Adkison is absolutely right. So, if instead the beginning of the code looks like this:
void someFunc(struct mg_connection *conn){
usleep(2*5000000);
std::cout << "hello!" << std::endl;
std::cout<< "This finished from server instance #"<<conn<<std::endl;
mg_send_header(conn, "Content-Type", "application/json");
mg_printf_data(conn, "{\"message\": \"This is a reply from server instance # %s\"}",
// (char *) conn->server_param);
}
void myEvent(struct mg_connection *conn){
std::thread mythread(someFunc,conn);
mythread.detach();
std::cout<< "This is a reply from server instance #"<<(char *) conn->server_param<<std::endl;
}
static int ev_handler(struct mg_connection *conn, enum mg_event ev) {
if (ev == MG_REQUEST) {
myEvent(conn);
return MG_TRUE;
} else if (ev == MG_AUTH) {
//.... exactly as before
//....
then the program works. Basically the difference is replacing .join() with .detach(). someFunc is running now in parallel for 2 users -- so that's great!. Thanks!

Related

Integration between Node.js and C++

I have a Node.js application that I want to be able to send a JSON-object into a C++ application.
The C++ application will use the Poco-libraries (pocoproject.org).
I want the interaction to be lighting fast, so preferably no files or network-sockets.
I have been looking into these areas:
Pipes
Shared memory
unixSockets
What should I focus on, and can someone point my direction to docs. and samples?
First of all, some more data is needed to give good advice.
In general shared memory is the fastest, since there's no transfer required, but it's also the hardest to keep fine. I'm not sure you'd be able to do that with Node though.
If this program is just running for this one task and closing it might be worth just sending your JSON to the CPP program as a startup param
myCPPProgram.exe "JsonDataHere"
The simplest thing with decent performance should be a socket connection using Unix domain sockets with some low-overhead data frame format. E.g., two-byte length followed by UTF-8 encoded JSON. On the C++ side this should be easy to implement using the Poco::Net::TCPServer framework. Depending on where your application will go in the future you may run into limits of this format, but if it's basically just streaming JSON objects it should be fine.
To make it even simpler, you can use a WebSocket, which will take care of the framing for you, at the cost of the overhead for the initial connection setup (HTTP upgrade request). May even be possible to run the WebSocket protocol over a Unix domain socket.
However, the performance difference between a (localhost only) TCP socket and a Unix domain socket may not even be significant, given all the JavaScript/node.js overhead. Also, if performance is really a concern, JSON may not even be the right serialization format to begin with.
Anyway, without more detailed information (size of JSON data, message frequency) it's hard to give a definite recommendation.
I created a TCPServer, which seems to work. However if I close the server and start it again I get this error:
Net Exception: Address already in use: /tmp/app.SocketTest
Is it not possible to re-attach to the socket if it exists?
Here is the code for the TCPServer:
#include "Poco/Util/ServerApplication.h"
#include "Poco/Net/TCPServer.h"
#include "Poco/Net/TCPServerConnection.h"
#include "Poco/Net/TCPServerConnectionFactory.h"
#include "Poco/Util/Option.h"
#include "Poco/Util/OptionSet.h"
#include "Poco/Util/HelpFormatter.h"
#include "Poco/Net/StreamSocket.h"
#include "Poco/Net/ServerSocket.h"
#include "Poco/Net/SocketAddress.h"
#include "Poco/File.h"
#include <fstream>
#include <iostream>
using Poco::Net::ServerSocket;
using Poco::Net::StreamSocket;
using Poco::Net::TCPServer;
using Poco::Net::TCPServerConnection;
using Poco::Net::TCPServerConnectionFactory;
using Poco::Net::SocketAddress;
using Poco::Util::ServerApplication;
using Poco::Util::Option;
using Poco::Util::OptionSet;
using Poco::Util::HelpFormatter;
class UnixSocketServerConnection: public TCPServerConnection
/// This class handles all client connections.
{
public:
UnixSocketServerConnection(const StreamSocket& s):
TCPServerConnection(s)
{
}
void run()
{
try
{
/*char buffer[1024];
int n = 1;
while (n > 0)
{
n = socket().receiveBytes(buffer, sizeof(buffer));
EchoBack(buffer);
}*/
std::string message;
char buffer[1024];
int n = 1;
while (n > 0)
{
n = socket().receiveBytes(buffer, sizeof(buffer));
buffer[n] = '\0';
message += buffer;
if(sizeof(buffer) > n && message != "")
{
EchoBack(message);
message = "";
}
}
}
catch (Poco::Exception& exc)
{
std::cerr << "Error: " << exc.displayText() << std::endl;
}
std::cout << "Disconnected." << std::endl;
}
private:
inline void EchoBack(std::string message)
{
std::cout << "Message: " << message << std::endl;
socket().sendBytes(message.data(), message.length());
}
};
class UnixSocketServerConnectionFactory: public TCPServerConnectionFactory
/// A factory
{
public:
UnixSocketServerConnectionFactory()
{
}
TCPServerConnection* createConnection(const StreamSocket& socket)
{
std::cout << "Got new connection." << std::endl;
return new UnixSocketServerConnection(socket);
}
private:
};
class UnixSocketServer: public Poco::Util::ServerApplication
/// The main application class.
{
public:
UnixSocketServer(): _helpRequested(false)
{
}
~UnixSocketServer()
{
}
protected:
void initialize(Application& self)
{
loadConfiguration(); // load default configuration files, if present
ServerApplication::initialize(self);
}
void uninitialize()
{
ServerApplication::uninitialize();
}
void defineOptions(OptionSet& options)
{
ServerApplication::defineOptions(options);
options.addOption(
Option("help", "h", "display help information on command line arguments")
.required(false)
.repeatable(false));
}
void handleOption(const std::string& name, const std::string& value)
{
ServerApplication::handleOption(name, value);
if (name == "help")
_helpRequested = true;
}
void displayHelp()
{
HelpFormatter helpFormatter(options());
helpFormatter.setCommand(commandName());
helpFormatter.setUsage("OPTIONS");
helpFormatter.setHeader("A server application to test unix domain sockets.");
helpFormatter.format(std::cout);
}
int main(const std::vector<std::string>& args)
{
if (_helpRequested)
{
displayHelp();
}
else
{
// set-up unix domain socket
Poco::File socketFile("/tmp/app.SocketTest");
SocketAddress unixSocket(SocketAddress::UNIX_LOCAL, socketFile.path());
// set-up a server socket
ServerSocket svs(unixSocket);
// set-up a TCPServer instance
TCPServer srv(new UnixSocketServerConnectionFactory, svs);
// start the TCPServer
srv.start();
// wait for CTRL-C or kill
waitForTerminationRequest();
// Stop the TCPServer
srv.stop();
}
return Application::EXIT_OK;
}
private:
bool _helpRequested;
};
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
UnixSocketServer app;
return app.run(argc, argv);
}
The solution I have gone for, is to use unix domain sockets. The solution will run on a Raspbian-setup and the socket-file is placed in /dev/shm, which is mounted into RAM.
On the C++ side, I use the Poco::Net::TCPServer framework as described elsewhere in this post.
On the Node.js side, I use the node-ipc module (http://riaevangelist.github.io/node-ipc/).

libuv - Limiting callback rate of idle event without blocking thread without multithreading

I'm using libsourcey which uses libuv as its underlying I/O networking layer.
Everything is setup and seems to run (haven't testen anything yet at all since I'm only prototyping and experimenting). However, I require that next to the application loop (the one that comes with libsourcey which relies on libuv's loop), also calls an "Idle function". As it is now, it calls the Idle CB on every cycle which is very CPU consuming. I'd need a way to limit the call-rate of the uv_idle_cb without blocking the calling thread which is the same the application uses to process I/O data (not sure about this last statement, correct me if i'm mistaken).
The idle function will be managing several different aspects of the application and it needs to run only x times within 1 second. Also, everything needs to run one the same thread (planning to upgrade an older application's network infrastructure which runs entirely single-threaded).
This is the code I have so far which also includes the test I did with sleeping the thread within the callback but it blocks everything so even the 2nd idle cb I set up has the same call-rate as the 1st one.
struct TCPServers
{
CTCPManager<scy::net::SSLSocket> ssl;
};
int counter = 0;
void idle_cb(uv_idle_t *handle)
{
printf("Idle callback %d TID %d\n", counter, std::this_thread::get_id());
counter++;
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(1000 / 25));
}
int counter2 = 0;
void idle_cb2(uv_idle_t *handle)
{
printf("Idle callback2 %d TID %d\n", counter2, std::this_thread::get_id());
counter2++;
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(1000 / 50));
}
class CApplication : public scy::Application
{
public:
CApplication() : scy::Application(), m_uvIdleCallback(nullptr), m_bUseSSL(false)
{}
void start()
{
run();
if (m_uvIdleCallback)
uv_idle_start(&m_uvIdle, m_uvIdleCallback);
if (m_uvIdleCallback2)
uv_idle_start(&m_uvIdle2, m_uvIdleCallback2);
}
void stop()
{
scy::Application::stop();
uv_idle_stop(&m_uvIdle);
if (m_bUseSSL)
scy::net::SSLManager::instance().shutdown();
}
void bindIdleEvent(uv_idle_cb cb)
{
m_uvIdleCallback = cb;
uv_idle_init(loop, &m_uvIdle);
}
void bindIdleEvent2(uv_idle_cb cb)
{
m_uvIdleCallback2 = cb;
uv_idle_init(loop, &m_uvIdle2);
}
void initSSL(const std::string& privateKeyFile = "", const std::string& certificateFile = "")
{
scy::net::SSLManager::instance().initNoVerifyServer(privateKeyFile, certificateFile);
m_bUseSSL = true;
}
private:
uv_idle_t m_uvIdle;
uv_idle_t m_uvIdle2;
uv_idle_cb m_uvIdleCallback;
uv_idle_cb m_uvIdleCallback2;
bool m_bUseSSL;
};
int main()
{
CApplication app;
app.bindIdleEvent(idle_cb);
app.bindIdleEvent2(idle_cb2);
app.initSSL();
app.start();
TCPServers srvs;
srvs.ssl.start("127.0.0.1", 9000);
app.waitForShutdown([&](void*) {
srvs.ssl.shutdown();
});
app.stop();
system("PAUSE");
return 0;
}
Thanks in advance if anyone can help out.
Solved the problem by using uv_timer_t and uv_timer_cb (Hadn't digged into libuv's doc yet). CPU usage went down drastically and nothing gets blocked.

Handling multiple connections using QThreadPool

Consider a situation where you need to maintain 256 tcp connections with devices just for ocassionally sending commands. I want to do this in parallel(It needs to block until it gets the response), I'm trying to use QThreadPool for this purpose but I have some doubts if it is possible.
I tried to use QRunnable but I'm not sure how sockets will behave between threads (sockets should be used only in thread that they were created in?)
I'm also worried about efficiency of this solution, I would be glad if somebody could propose some alternatives, not necessarily using QT.
Below I'm posting some snippets of the code.
class Task : public QRunnable {
Task(){
//creating TaskSubclass instance and socket in it
}
private:
TaskSubclass *sub;
void run() override {
//some debug info and variable setting...
sub->doSomething( args );
return;
}
};
class TaskSubclass {
Socket *sock; // socket instance
//...
void doSomething( args )
{
//writing to socket here
}
}
class MainProgram : public QObject{
Q_OBJECT
private:
QThreadPool *pool;
Task *tasks;
public:
MainProgram(){
pool = new QThreadPool(this);
//create tasks here
}
void run(){
//decide which task to start
pool->start(tasks[i]);
}
};
My favorite solution for this problem is by multiplexing your sockets using select(). That way you don't need to create additional threads, and it is a "very POSIX" way to do it.
See for example see this tutorial:
http://www.binarytides.com/multiple-socket-connections-fdset-select-linux/
Or a related question in:
Using select(..) on client
As OMD_AT has allready pointed out the best solution is to use Select() and let the kernel do the job for you :-)
here you have an example of an Async approach and an Syncron multi thread approach.
In this example we create 10 connection to a google webservice and make a simple get request to the server, we measure how long all connections in each approach needed to receive the response from the google server.
Be aware that you should use a more faster webserver to make a real test, like the localhost because the network latency has a big impact on the result.
#include <QCoreApplication>
#include <QTcpSocket>
#include <QtConcurrent/QtConcurrentRun>
#include <QElapsedTimer>
#include <QAtomicInt>
class Task : public QRunnable
{
public:
Task() : QRunnable() {}
static QAtomicInt counter;
static QElapsedTimer timer;
virtual void run() override
{
QTcpSocket* socket = new QTcpSocket();
socket->connectToHost("www.google.com", 80);
socket->write("GET / HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: www.google.com\r\n\r\n");
socket->waitForReadyRead();
if(!--counter) {
qDebug("Multiple Threads elapsed: %lld nanoseconds", timer.nsecsElapsed());
}
}
};
QAtomicInt Task::counter;
QElapsedTimer Task::timer;
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
QCoreApplication app(argc, argv);
// init
int connections = 10;
Task::counter = connections;
QElapsedTimer timer;
/// Async via One Thread (Select)
// handle the data
auto dataHandler = [&timer,&connections](QByteArray data) {
Q_UNUSED(data);
if(!--connections) qDebug(" Single Threads elapsed: %lld nanoseconds", timer.nsecsElapsed());
};
// create 10 connection to google.com and send an http get request
timer.start();
for(int i = 0; i < connections; i++) {
QTcpSocket* socket = new QTcpSocket();
socket->connectToHost("www.google.com", 80);
socket->write("GET / HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: www.google.com\r\n\r\n");
QObject::connect(socket, &QTcpSocket::readyRead, [dataHandler,socket]() {
dataHandler(socket->readAll());
});
}
/// Async via Multiple Threads
Task::timer.start();
for(int i = 0; i < connections; i++) {
QThreadPool::globalInstance()->start(new Task());
}
return app.exec();
}
Prints:
Multiple Threads elapsed: 62324598 nanoseconds
Single Threads elapsed: 63613967 nanoseconds
Although, the answer is already accepted, I would like to share my)
What I understood from your question: Having 256 currently active connections, from time to time you send a request ("command" as you named it) to one of them and wait for the response. Meanwhile, you want to make this process multithreaded and, though you said "It needs to block until it gets the response", I assume you implied blocking a thread which handles request-response process, but not the main thread.
If I indeed understand the question right, here is how I suggest to do it using Qt:
#include <functional>
#include <QObject> // need to add "QT += core" in .pro
#include <QTcpSocket> // QT += network
#include <QtConcurrent> // QT += concurrent
#include <QFuture>
#include <QFutureWatcher>
class CommandSender : public QObject
{
public:
// Sends a command via connection and blocks
// until the response arrives or timeout occurs
// then passes the response to a handler
// when the handler is done - unblocks
void SendCommand(
QTcpSocket* connection,
const Command& command,
void(*responseHandler)(Response&&))
{
const int timeout = 1000; // milliseconds, set it to -1 if you want no timeouts
// Sending a command (blocking)
connection.write(command.ToByteArray()); // Look QByteArray for more details
if (connection.waitForBytesWritten(timeout) {
qDebug() << connection.errorString() << endl;
emit error(connection);
return;
}
// Waiting for a response (blocking)
QDataStream in{ connection, QIODevice::ReadOnly };
QString message;
do {
if (!connection.waitForReadyRead(timeout)) {
qDebug() << connection.errorString() << endl;
emit error(connection);
return;
}
in.startTransaction();
in >> message;
} while (!in.commitTransaction());
responseHandler(Response{ message }); // Translate message to a response and handle it
}
// Non-blocking version of SendCommand
void SendCommandAsync(
QTcpSocket* connection,
const Command& command,
void(*responseHandler) (Response&&))
{
QFutureWatcher<void>* watcher = new QFutureWatcher<void>{ this };
connect(watcher, &QFutureWatcher<void>::finished, [connection, watcher] ()
{
emit done(connection);
watcher->deleteLater();
});
// Does not block,
// emits "done" when finished
QFuture<void> future
= QtConcurrent::run(this, &CommandSender::SendCommand, connection, command, responseHandler);
watcher->setFuture(future);
}
signals:
void done(QTcpSocket* connection);
void error(QTcpSocket* connection);
}
Now you can send a command to a socket using a separate thread taken from a thread pool: under the hood QtConcurrent::run() uses the global instance of QThreadPool provided by Qt for you. That thread blocks until it gets a response back and than handles it with responseHandler . Meanwhile, your main thread managing all your commands and sockets stays unblocked. Just catch done() signal which tells that response was received and handled successfully.
One thing to note: asynchronous version sends request only when there is a free thread in the thread pool and waits for it otherwise. Of course, that is the behavior for any thread pool (that is exactly the point of such pattern) but just do not forget about that.
Also I was writing code without Qt in handy so may contain some errors.
Edit: As it turned out, this is not thread safe as sockets are not reentrant in Qt.
What you can do about it is to associate a mutex with a socket and lock it each time you execute its function. This can be done easily creating a wrapper around QTcpSocket class. Please, correct me if I wrong.

Sending data in second thread with Mongoose server

I'm trying to create a multithread server application using mongoose web server library.
I have main thread serving connections and sending requests to processors that are working in their own threads. Then processors place results into queue and queue observer must send results back to clients.
Sources are looking that way:
Here I prepare the data for processors and place it to queue.
typedef std::pair<struct mg_connection*, const char*> TransferData;
int server_app::event_handler(struct mg_connection *conn, enum mg_event ev)
{
Request req;
if (ev == MG_AUTH)
return MG_TRUE; // Authorize all requests
else if (ev == MG_REQUEST)
{
req = parse_request(conn);
task_queue->push(TransferData(conn,req.second));
mg_printf(conn, "%s", ""); // (1)
return MG_MORE; // (2)
}
else
return MG_FALSE; // Rest of the events are not processed
}
And here I'm trying to send the result back. This function is working in it's own thread.
void server_app::check_results()
{
while(true)
{
TransferData res;
if(!res_queue->pop(res))
{
boost::this_thread::sleep_for(boost::chrono::milliseconds(100));
continue;
}
mg_printf_data(res.first, "%s", res.second); // (3)
}
}
The problem is a client doesn't receive anything from the server.
If I run check_result function manualy in the event_handler after placing a task into the queue and then pass computed result back to event_handler, I'm able to send it to client using mg_printf_data (with returning MG_TRUE). Any other way - I'm not.
What exactly should I change in this sources to make it works?
Ok... It looks like I've solved it myself.
I'd been looking into mongoose.c code and an hour later I found the piece of code below:
static void write_terminating_chunk(struct connection *conn) {
mg_write(&conn->mg_conn, "0\r\n\r\n", 5);
}
static int call_request_handler(struct connection *conn) {
int result;
conn->mg_conn.content = conn->ns_conn->recv_iobuf.buf;
if ((result = call_user(conn, MG_REQUEST)) == MG_TRUE) {
if (conn->ns_conn->flags & MG_HEADERS_SENT) {
write_terminating_chunk(conn);
}
close_local_endpoint(conn);
}
return result;
}
So I've tried to do mg_write(&conn->mg_conn, "0\r\n\r\n", 5); after line (3) and now it's working.

Callbacks are not getting called when using concurrent tasks in gearman

I did check the example reverse_client_cb with the reverse_worker as a worker.
The worker is getting called and executed but not a single callback ( complete,fail,etc) is getting called in the client.
Below is a sample worker and client that I wrote to check the same, but, same problem.
Is there any configuration that's need to be done in gearman or in the way the worker and clients are executed?
sampleworker.cc
void* myfunc(gearman_job_st *job, void *data,size_t *size,gearman_return_t *ret)
{
printf("\nmyfunc called\n");
*ret=GEARMAN_SUCCESS;
char *result=(char*)calloc(30,sizeof(char));
strcpy(result,"work completed");
*size=30;
return result;
}
int main(int args,char* argv[])
{
gearman_worker_st worker;
gearman_worker_create(&worker);
gearman_worker_add_server(&worker,"localhost",0);
gearman_return_t ret = gearman_worker_add_function(&worker,"sample",0,myfunc,NULL);
while(1) gearman_worker_work(&worker);
gearman_worker_free(&worker);
return 0;
}
sampleclient.cc
static gearman_return_t complete(gearman_task_st *task)
{
printf("Completed: %s %.*s\n", gearman_task_job_handle(task),
(int)gearman_task_data_size(task), (char *)gearman_task_data(task));
return GEARMAN_SUCCESS;
}
static gearman_return_t fail(gearman_task_st *task)
{
printf("Failed: %s\n", gearman_task_job_handle(task));
return GEARMAN_SUCCESS;
}
int main(int args,char* argv[])
{
gearman_client_st client;
gearman_return_t ret;
gearman_client_create(&client);
gearman_client_add_server(&client,"localhost",0);
gearman_task_st task,*task2;
gearman_client_add_task(&client,&task,NULL,"sample",NULL,argv[1],(size_t)strlen(argv[1]),&ret);
gearman_client_set_complete_fn(&client, &complete);
gearman_client_set_fail_fn(&client, &fail);
gearman_client_run_tasks(&client);
gearman_client_free(&client);
return 0;
}
usage
./sampleworker
./sampleclient Hello
"myfunc called" getting printed and the client is also waiting till the worker completes the job. But nothing is printed from complete or fail functions
got it.
I removed the following libs which was installed and now I'm getting all the callbacks.
libgearman-client-async-perl - Asynchronous client for gearman distributed job system
libgearman-client-perl - Client for gearman distributed job system.
in my opinion. your made some mistake in function invoking sequence.
gearman_client_set_complete_fn(&client, &complete);
gearman_client_set_fail_fn(&client, &fail);
// the function must be called after set_complete_fn
gearman_client_add_task
gearman_client_run_tasks(&client);