Boian Mitov wrote: > As you can see there are obvious scenarios where the granularity > approach seems to be the only reasonable one.
I think you misunderstood me: I wanted to say: *) Maximum granularity gives maximum performance, but as always there is a tradeoff. *) Problems come in if you have DIFFERENT resources to lock and are not able to maintain the right ORDER of locking, in the timeschedule. Locks are well researched but yesterdays technology, and there is no need to reinvent the wheel, because there are exising published DEADLOCK Avoidance and DEADLOCK Detection Algorithms available for decades ... (Start here http://www.acm.org/sigs) (So IMHO best would be to use existing and mathematical profen strategies) Please take a look at the papers at: http://www.cs.rochester.edu/~scott/ New directions are STM and Non Blocking Algorithms. I want not to criticise, understand your design, nor i want to make it better :-) Just some state of the art research info - read it or ignore it - what ever makes you happy ... There are much smarter people then we are maybe, at least for me this holds, inventing new wheels ... Greets, helmut _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
