Mailing-List: contact abdera-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: abdera-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of rooneg@gmail.com designates
 66.249.82.237 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=ktykT0W9YD3YviI+dpyzBIjbvrArp6nP1hzmqEbTb84xw+F4rHlRPrxKXFyx95ehWcBN/7w7JnXJUM1xAzSl0gz+H1XumS93Un4bEJv07QHqrlELJwJcL8zEndC6UxdMMudozgRdiqG0dhgnHaSegWMRCvEquY2q2x0g2+1xZT0=
Message-ID: <7edfeeef0609131436m401a3ca3p1bbf1fd0f90d5863@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 17:36:28 -0400
From: "Garrett Rooney" <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net>
Sender: rooneg@gmail.com
To: abdera-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: FOM Interfaces and Thread Safety
In-Reply-To: <45087534.20700@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <45087534.20700@gmail.com>

On 9/13/06, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> Currently the FOM Interface are not threadsafe.  For instance, if
> multiple threads try to call entry.setId(...) at the same time, it could
> cause some rather interesting results.  However, synchronizing the
> methods by default causes a very significant performance drop.  I
> propose that we simply take it as a given that the FOM objects are not
> threadsafe and that end developers, if they want to allow multiple
> threads to modify individual FOM objects, they must provide the
> necessary synchronization.

+1, synchronizing those objects seems like a horribly wasteful idea,
considering how seldom they are likely to be used from multiple
threads.

-garrett