[concurrency-interest] Timestamps-based ConcurrentMap

Jean Morissette jean.morissette at gmail.com
Fri Mar 10 23:04:42 EST 2006


2006/3/10, David Holmes <dcholmes at optusnet.com.au>:
> At this stage I'd ask exactly why you need an iterator that can be shared
> amongst threads. :)
>
> The desired semantics seem to be leading you into a no-win situation.
> Ultimately you will have to pay for it somewhere.

Sorry, I made a mistake in my first post. In fact, iterators *don't*
need to be shared amongst threads. However, they need to reflect the
state of the map at the creation of the iterator, independently of the
map update operations.

> The desired semantics seem to be leading you into a no-win situation.
> Ultimately you will have to pay for it somewhere.

Knowing that all is a question of compromises, I'm yet searching the
cheapest one :)

Thanks,
Jean



More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list