Re: [Boost-users] [signals] thread-safe post-disconnect() cleanup

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-22 19:54:04

Timmo Stange wrote:

> The smart pointer itself (including all temporary copies
> and the creation from a weak_ptr) uses atomic reference counting.
> Both are scalability issues (mostly the synchronization) and

No, atomic reference counting is typically not a scalability issue. 
"Scalability issue" means that K operations take more than K * (time for a 
single operation). A class-wide lock could do that, atomic 
increments/decrements usually do not.

> exceptionally heavy in simple absolute runtime cost (as much as
> 50 times the cost of a simple object copy and more, depending
> on the CPU and system).

I know of no such CPU or system.