[concurrency-interest] Elements in AtomicReferenceArray and AtomicReference both distinct?
stanimir at riflexo.com
Wed Aug 1 12:02:28 EDT 2012
Due to cache-coherency writing to an element would have effects on the
nearby elements too. It's called "false sharing":
[Write] Sharing (false or not) kills concurrency.
However there is no locking and the access to distinctive elements is
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Raph Frank <raphfrk at gmail.com> wrote:
> I always assumed that elements in an AtomicReferenceArray were
> distinct. Threads that accessed different elements would not
> This thread suggests otherwise, that the protection is at the entire
> array level.
> Which is correct, do an array of AtomicReferences give better concurrency?
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Concurrency-interest