[concurrency-interest] Transactional memory on GCC 4.7.0, what about Java?

Guy Korland gkorland at gmail.com
Wed Nov 23 01:08:13 EST 2011


I guess you should look as a reference at DeuceSTM (www.deucestm.org), what
we've done there is to instrument classes on load time.
This way we were able to support legacy libraries and not only the user
code.

Guy

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:33:30 +0100
From: ?iktor ?lang <viktor.klang at gmail.com>
To: Guy Korland <gkorland at gmail.com>
Cc: concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
Subject: Re: [concurrency-interest] Transactional memory on GCC 4.7.0,
       what about Java?
Message-ID:
       <CANPzfU9z871a8tE-gkUSZ62+yodEbBrMKggw+H-tDSaBk7-ZBw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Guy Korland <gkorland at gmail.com> wrote:

> What do you mean by you can't detect I/O? You can detect I/O also when
> calling external libraries.
>

Perhaps I'm missing what level you were planning to add this.


>
> Guy
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:50:06 +0100
> From: ?iktor ?lang <viktor.klang at gmail.com>
> To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com>
> Cc: concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
>
> Subject: Re: [concurrency-interest] Transactional memory on GCC 4.7.0,
>        what about Java?
> Message-ID:
>        <CANPzfU9VXNsjARFS9byt2DVSVLER3pWr2e3UsPktjA_1tapjuw at mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> > On 11/21/2011 10:03 PM, R?mi Forax wrote:
> > > On 11/21/2011 08:04 PM, Guy Korland wrote:
> > >> Not all the issues are solved, but it seems like most of the issues
> > >> have good answers.
> > >> Also, notice that in .NET they have issues which Java doesn't have
> > >> like Native code and pointers in C++.
> > >
> > > And how do you solve the IO problems (when you retry) ?
> >
> > There are basically two practical approaches to I/O:
> >
> > 1.  Don't do I/O in a transaction.
> >
> > 2.  Convert the transaction into a "relaxed" transaction, i.e. one
> > that uses a single global lock.
> >
>
> Problem is that you can't reliably detect IO, so that makes any call to a
> 3rd party jar a can of worms.
> Also, you cannot reliably detect blocking or non-termination, which makes
> this global lock the Devil(tm)
>
> Cheers,
> ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest
>
>


--
Viktor Klang

Akka Tech Lead
Typesafe <http://www.typesafe.com/> - Enterprise-Grade Scala from the
Experts

Twitter: @viktorklang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20111122/002245c1/attachment-0001.html
>

------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20111123/ba97f179/attachment.html>


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list