+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 <[email protected]> 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/ >
