Fortunately, WaitAll is easy to implement with any number of handles.  Here
is a simple example.

        public static void WaitAll(WaitHandle[] handles)
        {
            if (handles == null)
                throw new ArgumentNullException("handles");
            foreach (WaitHandle wh in handles)
            {
                wh.WaitOne();
            }
        }

--
William Stacey [C# MVP]

news:1166955143.196574.53360@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| Calling WaitAll with array of 64 or more causes exception
| WaitHandle.WaitAll(whaWaitHandlesArray);
|
| System.NotSupportedException: The number of WaitHandles must be less
| than or equal to 64.
|   at System.Threading.WaitHandle.WaitAll(WaitHandle[] waitHandles,
| Int32 millisecondsTimeout, Boolean exitContext)
|   at System.Threading.WaitHandle.WaitAll(WaitHandle[] waitHandles)
|
| Searching for the error string revealed no KB article or MSDN
| documentation.
| I did found MSFT answer regarding that on:
|
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.sqlserver.notificatio...
|
| The API documentation says it might throw NotSupportedException under
| the condition: "The number of objects in waitHandles is greater than
| the system permits."
|
| My questions are:
| 1. How can I find the system limitation? what does it depends on?
| 2. Any kb article that will provide link from the exception message to
| the real cause will be helpful for all the developers and will save us
| google time
|
| (About Google Vs www.Live.com - Live did not find even a single match
| ...)
|
| Loy
|