[concurrency-interest] Queue quest

√iktor Ҡlang viktor.klang at gmail.com
Mon Apr 14 10:03:16 EDT 2014


On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Oleksandr Otenko <
oleksandr.otenko at oracle.com> wrote:

>  Yes, but capacity availability is tricky to define.
>

Absolutely, I am open to suggestions!


>
> For example, knowing N threads are dequeuing, but haven't completed yet,
> does this count as capacity available or not?
>

It's fine with a MPSC queue.


>
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> On 14/04/2014 13:31, √iktor Ҡlang wrote:
>
> boolean offer(T t) - i.e. non-blockingly either adds t or not, depending
> on available capacity.
> On Apr 14, 2014 2:14 PM, "Oleksandr Otenko" <oleksandr.otenko at oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
>>  What do you mean, when you combine in one sentence "non-blocking" and
>> "bounded"?
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> On 08/04/2014 14:38, √iktor Ҡlang wrote:
>>
>> 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,
>>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Cheers,
√
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20140414/45db9fc9/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list