[concurrency-interest] Proposal WeightedLinkedBoundedQueue

Thierry Hanot thanot at infovista.com
Thu Nov 23 06:43:25 EST 2006


The weight is defined by the end user using a small interface yes.

I use the term weight but size is also relevant :-)

 

 

Thierry Hanot  

________________________________

From: David Holmes [mailto:dcholmes at optusnet.com.au] 
Sent: jeudi 23 novembre 2006 01:26
To: Thierry Hanot; concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
Subject: RE: [concurrency-interest] Proposal WeightedLinkedBoundedQueue

 

How do you define and measure the "weight" of an object? 

 

David Holmes

	-----Original Message-----
	From: concurrency-interest-bounces at cs.oswego.edu
[mailto:concurrency-interest-bounces at cs.oswego.edu]On Behalf Of Thierry
Hanot
	Sent: Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:18 PM
	To: concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
	Subject: [concurrency-interest] Proposal
WeightedLinkedBoundedQueue

	 

	A small proposal for adding a new class in the concurrent
package.

	All bounded collection are bounded to avoid to use to much
memory.(At least in my case :-)).

	But the element put in those collections are often with
different size. 

	In my case  BoundedQueue is used as an event queue and we can
have composite events which contains itself many events.

	What do you think about adding some bounded collection no more
based on the count but on the sum of the weight of the object inside?

	 

	After a quick look on the code of the LinkedBoundedQueue it
seems pretty easy to do.

	 

	Does somebody else can see the advantage of this kind of object
and is there enough people interested to make it a part of the
concurrent package?

	 

	B.R

	 

	 

	Thierry Hanot  

	 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20061123/721889dc/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list