[concurrency-interest] Bounded TransferQueue
davidcholmes at aapt.net.au
Tue Aug 24 03:48:53 EDT 2010
Not sure I understand your "problem" here. You write a BoundedTransferQueue
that has-a LinkedTransferQueue and a Semaphore.
From: concurrency-interest-bounces at cs.oswego.edu
[mailto:concurrency-interest-bounces at cs.oswego.edu]On Behalf Of Viktor Klang
Sent: Tuesday, 24 August 2010 5:39 PM
To: Joe Bowbeer
Cc: concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
Subject: Re: [concurrency-interest] Bounded TransferQueue
The problem with that would be that I'd have to wrap the queue and make
sure I have the Semaphore in place in all places that matter, and then
implement remainingCapacity etc, I'd rather not do that so if it's possible
If someone has an impl under a permissive license (ApacheV2, MIT, BSD or
such) I'd be very thankful for it.
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Joe Bowbeer <joe.bowbeer at gmail.com>
In a previous discussion, Doug Lea wrote:
"For the bounded case, it's hard to do any better than use a Semaphore
in front of a LinkedTransferQueue."
I don't know if the thinking has changed any since then.
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Viktor Klang wrote:
It's late here and I've rummaged through the Internet in it's entirety
so I'll get straight to the point,
I have a dire need for a bounded TransferQueue, and the
LinkedTransferQueue states that it's unbounded,
does anyone have any suggestions where I can find a (highly
performant) bounded TransferQueue?
Concurrency-interest mailing list
Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Concurrency-interest