[boost] Re: thread: rw_lock

From: Michael Glassford (glassfordm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-21 12:52:05

I've been following the thread you reference at the end of your post. I
found the reference you posted in
http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=3DAA9F0F.D3EA3B55%40web.de
(implementing rwlocks via compare-and-swap instructions) particularly
interesting, but haven't had time to follow up in it yet.

Thanks,

Mike

"Alexander Terekhov" <terekhov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:3DB439C0.7BE00CEC_at_web.de...
>
> Michael Glassford wrote:
> [...]
> > a) As I understand it, an implementation of rw locks using condition
> > variables, etc., (such as this one), although it may be correct, will be
> > inefficient. I hope at some point to address this, particularly if there
is
> > interest from others.
>
> Others (I speak for myself and a few friends over here -- in this case)
> usually use pthread_rwlock_t/pthread_rwlockattr_t...
>
> regards,
> alexander.
>
> --
> http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=3D9052BF.9AC9D0ED%40web.de
> http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=3DAA9F0F.D3EA3B55%40web.de
> (Subject: Re: rwlock using pthread_cond)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>