Subject: Re: [boost] [transact] code in sandbox
Date: 2010-02-17 05:25:57
Zitat von "vicente.botet" <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>:
> The mix of optimistic and pessimistic strategies needs a careful design.
could you explain what the difference is wrt Boost.Transact?
whether there is an optimistic conflict or a pessimistic deadlock, the
solution is retry.
> We need to consider how contention management helps to avoid
> starvation with optimistic synchronization. Transaction priorities
> could be a way, other need to be considered, and see if the
> interface is enough open to let the user choose its contention
> management strategy.
could you point me to a good introduction on that issue?
I always assumed low-contention and conflicts being the exception,
which I think is a valid assumption for persistent objects, but not
necessarily for transactional memory.
in one example using your macros the priority of a transaction was
increased on contention. I don't understand how that helps when two or
more threads contend about a resource. the priority of all threads
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk