Robert Jacques Wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 15:41:31 -0400, Brian Palmer <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> > It probably wasn't very clear from my simplified example, but I'm > >> looking to create a shared-reader-one-writer scenario. If I declare > >> MyValue synchronized, only one thread can be inside the get() method at > >> a time, which defeats the shared-reader requirement. Imagine this is a > >> much larger more complex data structure, where get() requires walking > >> through multiple levels of a tree and a binary search at the last level. > >> > > >> > >> Yup, I get it. But there is one point in it: write is not atomic > >> operation in sense that get() might return half written data, right? > > > > No, that's why I want a read-write lock. Multiple threads can read the > > data, but writes take an exclusive lock. > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readers-writer_lock > > Have you tried core.sync.rwmutex? Also, please remember that CREW locks > are not composable and can easily lead to dead-locks.
lol, yes, that's how this thread started was with a discussion of core.sync.rwmutex.
