By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
455,694 Members | 1,320 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 455,694 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Socket and multi-threading

P: n/a
Hi,

Socket class documentation says that it is not thread safe. We understand
that if do simultaneous sends on ONE socket then it will be a problem (or
simultaneous receive). Can we create TWO threads on OUR OWN such that one
will do SEND and one will do RECEIVE using the SAME socket reference? This
means that two threads WILL BE in the same SOCKET object - one doing receive
and one doing send. We know we can use asynchronous calls on the socket to
achieve this but whether we can do this using our own threads. Any pointers
to official documentation that shows that this is permissible?

Thanks in advance,
Regards,
Mahesh


Nov 21 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
4 Replies


P: n/a
Mahesh,

I know that this subject (and like this) is often been in the newsgroups

Maybe you find something in these threads before somebody else answers you.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...rch+this+group

I hope this helps,

Cor
Nov 21 '05 #2

P: n/a
www.vbip.com

Cor Ligthert wrote:
Mahesh,

I know that this subject (and like this) is often been in the newsgroups

Maybe you find something in these threads before somebody else answers you.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...rch+this+group

I hope this helps,

Cor

Nov 21 '05 #3

P: n/a
Mahesh Devjibhai Dhola [MVP] wrote:
Hi,

Socket class documentation says that it is not thread safe. We understand
that if do simultaneous sends on ONE socket then it will be a problem (or
simultaneous receive). Can we create TWO threads on OUR OWN such that one
will do SEND and one will do RECEIVE using the SAME socket reference? This
means that two threads WILL BE in the same SOCKET object - one doing receive
and one doing send. We know we can use asynchronous calls on the socket to
achieve this but whether we can do this using our own threads. Any pointers
to official documentation that shows that this is permissible?

If you perform synchronized use of the socket by using thread locks (that is perform a
sending operation with one thread, after the other thread has finished reading), then I
suppose it is OK. However why are you using the Socket class itself for this?
In a book I am currently reading about .NET networking, stream socket communication is
performed in the style:

(get the connection Socket)
get a NetworkStream/create a NetworkStream with the Socket object
create a BinaryWriter and a BinaryReader with the NetworkStream

use the BinaryReader and BinaryWriter for network I/O

Call methods Close() of BinaryReader, BinaryWriter, NetworkStream, (Socket) in turn.
Nov 21 '05 #4

P: n/a
You should be able to use a Monitor to lock one thread (Monitor.Enter(Me) and
Monitor.Wait(Me)) to ensure the second thread is finished (use
Monitor.Enter(Me) and Monitor.Pulse(Me) and Monitor.Exit(Me) in the second
class.

"Mahesh Devjibhai Dhola [MVP]" wrote:
Hi,

Socket class documentation says that it is not thread safe. We understand
that if do simultaneous sends on ONE socket then it will be a problem (or
simultaneous receive). Can we create TWO threads on OUR OWN such that one
will do SEND and one will do RECEIVE using the SAME socket reference? This
means that two threads WILL BE in the same SOCKET object - one doing receive
and one doing send. We know we can use asynchronous calls on the socket to
achieve this but whether we can do this using our own threads. Any pointers
to official documentation that shows that this is permissible?

Thanks in advance,
Regards,
Mahesh


Nov 21 '05 #5

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.