[concurrency-interest] Is there a ConcurrentBlockingQueue ??
hanson.char at gmail.com
Tue Mar 20 19:30:39 EDT 2007
No hassle at all. Thanks for the scrutiny!
On 3/20/07, Gregg Wonderly <gregg at cytetech.com> wrote:
> Hanson Char wrote:
> > Hi Gregg,
> >> It seems like parkq should always be emptied
> > I think I see what you mean. Yes there is a chance that some unparked
> > items are left over in parkq, if an item is placed to q after a
> > ThreadMarker is placed to parkq but before the thread (of the
> > associated ThreadMarker) is parked. In such case, the left-over
> > ThreadMarker's would have "parked" set to false.
> > The logic in the offer method attempts to minimize the left-over in
> > parkq by removing all consecutive ThreadMarker with "parked" set to
> > false.
> duh... I missed that looping logic associated with "parked". I was thinking it
> returned no matter what. It looks to me like that should take care of the left
> behind "unparked" marker entries.
> Sorry for the hassle.
> Gregg Wonderly
More information about the Concurrency-interest