river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gregg Wonderly <gr...@wonderly.org>
Subject Re: TaskManager progress
Date Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:58:33 GMT
Here are some thoughts/questions as I look at the code.  Thanks for taking this 
task on!

in add(Task)
	is the order of taskToWrapper.put() vs addTasks.add() important
	compared to the use of the contents of those?  Is this an atomic
	relationship that needs to involve some logic to make the 'view'
	atomic in nature, such as reordering these two statements?
	In TaskWrapper.endTask() the order is reversed and this implies
	that the order of these statements is important to your design,
	so I just want to make sure I understand their relationship.

in remove(TaskWrapper,boolean)
	Can there be a transition of states between the time the switch
	statement is started and the time the specific case executes?
	Do we need a lock here to hold the thread in its current state
	so that WAITING and READY threads are correctly "stopped"?

--runnable and ++runnable
	This is not concurrency safe.  I'd suggest an AtomicInteger instead,
	especially if there is no other reason to use "synchronized" where
	this is done.  Visibility needs to be guaranteed using some happens
	before as well.

When I write code of this nature, attempting to remove all contention, I try
to list every "step" that changes the "view" of the world, and think about
how that "view" can be made atomic by using explicit ordering of statements
rather than synchronized{} blocks.  Visibility still has to work, so one also
needs to worry about "happens before" as well.  This looks like a really good
start on the algorithmic steps.  Hopefully, some others can look things
over and contribute any other issues or improvements they have.

Gregg Wonderly

Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> I've uploaded a new version with tabs for indentation.
> 
> Patricia
> 
> 
> On 7/21/2010 9:33 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> No problem. That sort of thing I'll handle later by reformatting after
>> setting up the project settings in Eclipse.
>>
>> Patricia
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/21/2010 8:55 AM, Gregg Wonderly wrote:
>>> One of my most desired attributes of code is that tabs be used in place
>>> of spaces. The reason for this, is so that I can change tab expansion,
>>> on the fly, to narrow or widen the view of nested blocks to help me
>>> better see what is there.
>>>
>>> This is a religious kind of issue, and I know there are countless people
>>> who think otherwise. As a VI user, I, countless times, have typed ':set
>>> ts=4 sw=4'
>>> and ':set ts=8 sw=8' in code to change my viewpoint.
>>>
>>> I know that others have reasons why they prefer spaces. I've just never
>>> been able to find any override factors that make spaces a good choice,
>>> especially when you are in an editor without a mouse.
>>>
>>> Gregg Wonderly
>>>
>>> Peter Firmstone wrote:
>>>> Thanks Patricia, looking good, will take some time to digest it 
>>>> further.
>>>>
>>>> We don't have a set of coding conventions, unless someone wants to
>>>> write a tool, there used to be one in com.sun.jini.tool, as evidenced
>>>> by one of the jtreg tests
>>>>
>>>> trunk/qa/jtreg/com/sun/jini/tool/CheckCodeStyle
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps there are some widely available tool that we could settle on?
>>>>
>>>> I like to follow Kent Beck's style in his book Implementation Patterns
>>>> ISBN-10 0-321-41309-1, it's quite a small book and makes easy reading,
>>>> but that's just my personal preference.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Peter.
>>>>
>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>>>> I've uploaded my current work-in-progress code as
>>>>> http://www.patriciashanahan.com/apache/NewTaskManager.java
>>>>>
>>>>> Please send me any comments, questions, or suggestions for 
>>>>> improvement.
>>>>>
>>>>> The change of name is temporary, to allow a smoother transition. I
>>>>> plan to work through the callers, changing them one at a time to use
>>>>> the new Task interface. When they have all been changed, and there
>>>>> are no more TaskManager references, the name can be changed to
>>>>> TaskManager.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll need to set up the correct formatting in Eclipse, but once I
>>>>> find the rules that won't take long. Any other coding conventions I
>>>>> need to watch out for?
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile, I'm working on more testing and benchmarking. It
>>>>> definitely improves performance when there are a lot of tasks or
>>>>> runAfter dependencies, but I need to do more testing for short tasks
>>>>> in simple cases, the case in which it is most likely to be worse than
>>>>> the current code.
>>>>>
>>>>> Patricia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/20/2010 2:48 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
>>>>>> Looking forward to seeing some code. SVN builds clean again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>>>>>> I did the first tests of my new TaskManager today. I can't benchmark
>>>>>>> very accurately because of a QA test running on the same computer,
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>> it seems to be about the same without dependencies, and 
>>>>>>> significantly
>>>>>>> faster with dependencies. Specifically, it removes the single
task
>>>>>>> bottleneck.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'll next do more testing, benchmarking, and tuning in my own
>>>>>>> environment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Patricia
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message