[concurrency-interest] Queue quest

√iktor Ҡlang viktor.klang at gmail.com
Tue Apr 8 12:17:25 EDT 2014


Hi Sergey,

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Sergey Mashkov <comm at sergey-mashkov.net>wrote:

> Hi Viktor
>
> Well, if it will not make you anger, why don't you mention Java's
> LinkedBlockingQueue? In 99% cases it's sufficient so you generally don't
> need lock-free algos.
>

Yep, that's a good fallback, but I figured I'd ask first :)


>
> By the way I don't think it's possible to implement in practice actually
> efficient non-blocking queue with no preallocated buffer.
>

Well, for some definition of efficient :-)
Given that most queues spend their lives either full or empty, a
preallocated buffer may not make sense in case there are many millions of
them and they spend their lives mostly empty.


>
> Kind regards
> Sergey
>
> √iktor Ҡlang писал 2014-04-08 06:38:
>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> I thought I'd throw this question out there before I go all out NIH.
>>
>> Does anybody know of an open source (apache 2 compatible) "minimal
>> overhead", non-blocking, bounded, non-constant-space (i.e. no
>> ringbuffer or preallocated size array) multiple-producer
>> single-consumer/multiple-consumer queues in Java/bytecode?
>>
>> --
>>
>>  Cheers,
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> Concurrency-interest mailing list
>> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
>> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest
>



-- 
Cheers,
√
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20140408/dad7a35b/attachment.html>


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list