incubator-directmemory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org>
Subject Re: changing the DM behavior at runtime
Date Sun, 26 Feb 2012 07:38:28 GMT
guys, can you please open a separated discussion about concurrency?
the thread has been completely hijacked  :(

best,
-Simo

http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/



On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Tommaso Teofili
<tommaso.teofili@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think ConcurrentSkipLisMap [1] would be also a nice option to inspect
> (should be more performant [2]).
> I think I can make some tests next week.
> Tommaso
>
> [1] :
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ConcurrentSkipListMap.html
> [2] :
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1811782/when-should-i-use-concurrentskiplistmap
>
>
> 2012/2/26 Michael André Pearce <michael.andre.pearce@me.com>
>
>> Haha i knew i remember seeing something, we can take insperation for key
>> locking from how concurrenthashmap achieves it.
>>
>>
>> http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/dl/classes/EDU/oswego/cs/dl/util/concurrent/ConcurrentHashMap.java
>>
>>
>>
>> On 26 Feb 2012, at 01:14, Michael André Pearce wrote:
>>
>> > Doug Lee and using hashes, though i still cant remember for the life of
>> me where ive seen this atm. (it cant be too distant past if i remember the
>> guys name)
>> >
>> >
>> > On 26 Feb 2012, at 01:06, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1 concurrency is still an open issue in DM
>> >>
>> >> best,
>> >> -Simo
>> >>
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> >> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>> >> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>> >> http://www.99soft.org/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 1:33 AM, Michael André Pearce
>> >> <michael.andre.pearce@me.com> wrote:
>> >>> Also can i suggest locking on the key for put/updates/deletes? avoids
>> someone getting a key whilst it is in transitive state of being updated by
>> another, ive seen before a fancy way of doing this, avoiding a lock for
>> every key, will have to try remember.
>> >>>
>> >>> On 26 Feb 2012, at 00:24, Simone Tripodi wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Hi all guys,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I had a chat with Benoit in another thread and I realized no one
of
>> >>>> our class is Thread safe - what do you think of actual behavior
that
>> >>>> every component accepts a setter for any member - that could cause
>> >>>> strange behaviors at runtime?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I would analyze wich components can be converted to immutable -
IIUC
>> >>>> Benoit agreed with me on having some PointerImpl members as immutable,
>> >>>> i.e. CacheService#setMap( ConcurrentMap<K, Pointer<V>>
map ) means
>> >>>> dropping all the already stored data :)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thoughts?
>> >>>> best,
>> >>>> -Simo
>> >>>>
>> >>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> >>>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>> >>>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>> >>>> http://www.99soft.org/
>> >>>
>> >
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message