in reply to Is it possible to create a single Hash-of-Hash.. with multiple threads..

G'day gsat,

Welcome to the monastery.

Is this the sort of thing you were after:

#!/usr/bin/env perl use strict; use warnings; use autodie; use threads; use threads::shared; use Storable; my $storable_file = './pm_1078249_stored_hash'; { my $hoh_to_store = { A => { B => 2, C => 3 }, D => { E => 5, F => +6 } }; store $hoh_to_store => $storable_file; } my @threads; my %hohoh :shared; for (1 .. 3) { push @threads, threads->create(sub { $hohoh{threads->tid} = shared_clone(retrieve $storable_file); }); } $_->join for @threads; # Test result use Data::Dumper; print Dumper \%hohoh; # My housekeeping unlink $storable_file;

Output:

$VAR1 = { '1' => { 'D' => { 'E' => 5, 'F' => 6 }, 'A' => { 'B' => 2, 'C' => 3 } }, '2' => { 'D' => { 'E' => 5, 'F' => 6 }, 'A' => { 'B' => 2, 'C' => 3 } }, '3' => { 'A' => { 'B' => 2, 'C' => 3 }, 'D' => { 'E' => 5, 'F' => 6 } } };

[You appear to have put square brackets around several pieces of text in your OP. This generates links here. See "Writeup Formatting Tips" and "What shortcuts can I use for linking to other information?" for details of how to fix your post.]

-- Ken

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Is it possible to create a single Hash-of-Hash.. with multiple threads..
by gsat (Initiate) on Apr 25, 2014 at 01:17 UTC

    Thanks much for your time. Your code is simple & works fine - I guess because it is simple 2 level deep & the subroutine is not increasing the depth while working.

    The data structure - I am handling with, will increase the structure depth. Basically branch-out, like a growing tree, every thread working on a unique branch is OK.

    As other suggestions came like - Storing output in a new structure - and finally merging it - is fine - how to return different sized depth of every branch structure varying between 9 to 14, number of branches would few tens of thousands - and join them to form the final tree.

    The starting structure that I need to share across threads - will be having depths like 4-6 level, when threads finished working every branch will have 9-14 levels.

    BTW, in my experience, the %hash kind of usage are not very convenient, rather - I prefer reference of hash-ref-of-hash-ref - right from the root. I used to like..

    $root->{$branch1}->{$branch2}..

    Overall - so far in my understanding - perl threads is not cool, no matter what - It really cannot do big job with complex data structure in shared way - absolutely no references shared between threads. Internally every thread is creating another copy, so with GBs of data-structure I cannot really launch many threads.

    My single-thread serialized code is working great though - it can do serious work on massive data-structures. It lacks true parallelism..

    Perl Threads implementation so far, seems very inadequate - it is good for primary school student exhibiting how parallel programming works.

    I wish next gen threads will be able to do what I am asking - seamless work on the shared structure over GPUs too [why not - being Interpreted, won't stop it running in GPU I guess. :) - anyway Thanks a lot again!!

      Perl Threads implementation so far, seems very inadequate - it is good for primary school student exhibiting how parallel programming works.

      That is a wrong conclusion drawn through a lack of understanding.

      If you would care to describe your application in detail -- not just generics, but rather scales and reasons; with examples of data and processing requirements -- then you would (probably) get help with finding definitive, practical and efficient solutions to those requirements.

      Your OP asks a simplistic question with an obvious answer: Yes, of course a multi-level hash can be constructed using multiple threads. It is simple and trivial:

      #! perl -slw use strict; use threads; use threads::shared; sub displayHash { my( $ref, $pad ) = @_; return "\n" unless keys %{ $ref }; my $buf = ''; for my $key ( sort keys %{ $ref } ) { $buf .= "$pad" if length $buf; $buf .= "{$key}" . displayHash( $ref->{ $key }, $pad . ' ' ) +; } return $buf; } sub worker { my( $ref, $reps ) = @_; for( 1 .. $reps ) { my $copyRef = $ref; for my $step ( map chr( 97 + rand 26 ), 1 .. int( rand 10 ) ) +{ if( exists $copyRef->{ $step } ) { $copyRef = $copyRef->{ $step }; } else { lock %{ $copyRef }; $copyRef = $copyRef->{ $step } = &share( {} ); } } } } our $REPS //= 20; our $THREADS //= 4; my %HoHos : shared; my @threads = map threads->create( \&worker, \%HoHos, $REPS ), 1 .. $T +HREADS; $_->join for @threads; print displayHash( \%HoHos, '' ); __END__ C:\test>junk91 -REPS=7 {b}{l}{w}{g} {d}{t}{k}{f}{g}{g}{g}{i}{j} {f}{j}{v} {g}{s}{g}{h}{g} {i}{f}{j}{r}{m}{v}{u}{v}{b} {k}{d}{f}{q}{k} {z}{t}{m}{h}{e}{i} {m}{b}{l} {l}{u}{p}{t}{d}{h} {q}{k}{y} {n}{f}{u}{v}{z}{z}{l} {o}{f} {p}{u}{s}{w}{n}{t} {q}{h} {y}{k}{d}{l}{a}{n}{a}{i} {r}{q}{t}{g} {v}{o}{n}{x}{b}{g}{c} {w}{a} {y}{a} {d}{y}{j} {z}{a}{p}{t}{i}{r}{t} {y}{i}{g}{c}{v}{z}{z}{k}

      But, it is also probably not very helpful to your real application.


      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

        Dear Monk BrowserUk! Please take a bow!!

        Thank You so much - for enlightening me :) Indeed - it was my lack of understanding.

        I have found this entire discussion from everybody - very helpful.

        -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

        Now, I need more :) It seems - me and my code is tired of doing so many .. if exists.. else share.. kinda additives before I do any structure change - and I think no way to avoid that. Now a couple of Questions here:

        Q1. Is there any easier method?

        Q2. Is it possible to grow a local tree or branch data-structure, then create a shared_clone - and graft the new tree to s sub-branch of main shared tree?

        Q3. I have few subroutines to be called many times - based on data - from inside my thread_worker. So far I am lacking depth in understanding or visualizing - how/when multiple threads work on different set of data, while calling a subroutine - does the code-inside-subroutine-block gets a replicated inside the thread uniquely? - else how the sanity is retained? - sorry if I am asking too basic question - maybe it is the case, I am confused - and not clear enough - where is my confusion too..

        Q4. Inside subroutine - do I have to use every variable as local and not-shared?

        Thanks a lot! Again & Again!