Boost logo

Boost :

From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-09 08:51:21

On Sep 9, 2005, at 7:57 AM, John Maddock wrote:

>> If priority policy is the overriding issue, I recommend considering
>> Alexander Terekhov's algorithm summarized here:
> Interesting, clearly using interlocked operations where possible is a
> real
> win, and would certainly be easy to implement on Win32.

That should be in capitals: Real Win (tm) ;-)

(which is a PPC implementation making use of atomic primitives)

Note this is not lock-free. It is only lock-free in the case of no
contention for the mutex. If there is contention, an OS mutex must be
locked. I'm calling it lock-reduced for lack of better terminology at
the moment.

> Unfortunately, I don't believe the algorithm you provide is compatible
> with
> the current interface, which promises to let the user choose how to
> schedule
> interleaves between readers and writers. On the other hand, it is that
> interface which is part of the problem: it introduces too much
> complexity,
> and too many code-paths through which locking could occur to be able to
> analyse the code easily. So maybe we should dump the current
> interface.

Or maybe independently develop the Terekhov algorithm, and stress test
the two side by side ... um if we can get the current interface


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at