[concurrency-interest] AtomicReferenceFieldUpdater vs Unsafe
mlists at juma.me.uk
Thu Nov 17 08:30:12 EST 2011
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Roman Elizarov <elizarov at devexperts.com>wrote:
> Unsafe is big and that’s a separate issue from concurrency patterns (CAS
> is that we started with).
I know that, of course. Many people in this list (most?) are not only
interested in concurrency so I thought it was relevant.
> The problem is that ByteBuffer is not as fast as byte – even though it
> uses Unsafe inside,
That is not the only problem (both snappy and compress-lzf moved from using
normal operations on byte to using Unsafe with byte).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Concurrency-interest