[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2779?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12964514#action_12964514
]
Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-2779:
-----------------------------------------
Shai, I actually think Earwin is right with his claim that this is unneeded /
pointless really. Performance on modern JVMs is very good for both RWLock and
synchronized blocks and to make a big difference heavy contention is needed
anyway. I would not expect any difference if you are on a Java 6 JVM at all
even if you'd have heavy contention. I have looked into this too a while ago
and came to the same conclusion as earwin, there seem to be no real gain in
refactoring this to use RWLocks instead fo sync blocks.
> Use ReadWriteLock in RAMDirectory
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2779
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2779
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Store
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Assignee: Shai Erera
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>
>
> RAMDirectory synchronizes on its instance in many places to protect access to
> map of RAMFiles, in addition to updating the sizeInBytes member. In many
> places the sync is done for 'read' purposes, while only in few places we need
> 'write' access. So I think ReadWriteLock can be useful.
> Also, syncing around sizeInBytes is unnecessary IMO, since it's an AtomicLong
> ...
> I'll post a patch shortly.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
