##You have a threading bug here:
void fetch_weather_async()
{
while (current_city + 1 < (int) cities.size()){
// Say there is only one city left to fetch the data from.
// And both threads have reached this lock at the same time
// (multi processor system). One will get the lock the other
// will stall waiting for the lock.
city_counter_lock.lock();
int city_index = 0;
// The first thread threw the lock will satisfy this
// condition and get to processes the last city.
// The second thread through the lock (after the first
// releases it) will find this condition will fail and
// as a result have `city_index = 0`
if (current_city + 1 < (int) cities.size()) {
city_index = ++current_city;
}
city_counter_lock.unlock();
// Both threads now execute the following code.
// But one is set to processes the last item,
// the other is going to re-processes the first item.
std::cout << "requesting " << city_index << std::endl;
fetchJson(city_index);
std::cout << "acquired " << city_index << std::endl;
// You have encountered your first race condition.
}
}
##Your timing is not accurate:
std::thread thread_1(&fetch_weather_async);
std::thread thread_2(&fetch_weather_async);
// By the time you get the time here.
// The two threads could have actually finished.
// So you are just timing the cost of the join operation.
// --
// Or the threads could be half finished by the time you get
// here. So what you are timing here is indeterminate.
start = std::time(nullptr);
thread_1.join();
thread_2.join();
finish = std::time(nullptr);
##Your biggest bottle neck is here:
city_counter_lock.lock();
int city_index = 0;
if (current_city + 1 < (int) cities.size()) {
city_index = ++current_city;
}
city_counter_lock.unlock();
By simply removing this bottle neck I removed 5 seconds (averaged over three runs). I simply made one thread do even cities and the other thread do odd cities (I know its not a perfect solution but I wanted do demonstrate the cost of threads being blocked by each other on such a coarse grain).
// I changed the declaration of `fetch_weather_async()`
void fetch_weather_async(bool);
// I changed how the the thread is called.
std::thread thread_1(fetch_weather_async, false);
std::thread thread_2(fetch_weather_async, true);
// Finally I simply changed the function
// so they started at different points.
void fetch_weather_async(bool odd){
unsigned int cityIndex = (odd ? 1 : 0);
for (;cityIndex < cities.size(); cityIndex += 2){
std::cout << "requesting " << cityIndex << std::endl;
fetchJson(cityIndex);
std::cout << "acquired " << cityIndex << std::endl;
}
}
##Another Bug (but this one a normal bug)
// This is a classic anti pattern for reading a file.
// The trouble is the last read reads upto but not past
// the EOF. Thus even though there is no data left in the
// file to read the method eof() will return false.
// So you will enter the loop even though there is nothing
// to read.
while(! idFile.eof()){
// The problem is here.
// If there is nothing left to read in the file this
// getline will fail. You should be checking the result
// of calling getline before performing the next action.
//
// I am not sure of the affect on `currentLine` when
// the call fails it is either made blank or left unchanged.
// So the last line in your list is either empty
// or a repeat of the last item in the file.
getline (idFile, currentLine);
cities.push_back(currentLine);
}
The correct way to use a loop to read a file is:
std::ifstream file("FileName");
std::string line;
// Notice we check the result of the `getline()` as part of
// the loop condition. So we only enter the loop body if the
// read happened correctly.
while(std::getline(file, line)) {
cities.push_back(line);
}
If all your cities are guaranteed to be one word. you can use a simpler trick.
std::vector<std::string> cities(std::istream_iterator<std::string>(file),
std::istream_iterator<std::string>());