[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode)

From: Andreas Rottmann
Subject: Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode)
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 19:36:41 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)

Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:

>> I'm a little wary of the locking, especially global locking, but I
>> suppose it may well be necessary.  I don't have a strong feeling
>> either way offhand, but presuming for the moment that it is necessary,
>> then is there any way to lock down a particular value rather than the
>> entire heap?
> Having a lock for every object would have a high overhead and give you
> very little in terms of performance, I guess.  Also, they would be
> tricky to use.
Why would the overhead be significantly larger than for one object?
Pika will have per-object locks, and I think the implementation chosen
has little overhead over global locking.

> When you need to lock two objects, there would be the danger of
> deadlocks, when other code needs to lock the exact same two objects,
> but does it in reverse order.
You could probably solve this by having an poeration that does an
"atomic" lock of serveral objects. Naive algorithm:

1) lock all objects you can
2) if that's all:
     release all objects locked previously, wait a bit and goto 1)

> You would also have to allow locking an object twice, further
> increasing overhead.
Why do you need to lock an object twice?

Andreas Rottmann         | address@hidden      | address@hidden | address@hidden      | GnuPG Key:
Fingerprint              | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219  F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62

Say NO to Software Patents! --

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]