Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #3765
| From | markspace <-@.> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? |
| Date | 2011-05-07 09:35 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <iq3scr$j6q$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <iq1kf0$ee2$1@news.albasani.net> <iq1mmc$hbv$1@dont-email.me> <iq348b$iv1$1@news.albasani.net> |
On 5/7/2011 2:43 AM, Sebastian wrote:
> Now I want to be able to close a workspace, releasing all tasks
> to be assignable again to other workspaces.
>
> public void closeWorkspace( Workspace ws ) {
> // how do this efficiently? iterate over all
> // entries (holding a write lock) and remove it
> // when the value equals ws?
> }
Fundamentally, I don't see any solution other than Patricia's. And I
think you'll need to hold locks for atomicity over all structures
anyway: I can't think of a different way of doing it. Unless your
problem can somehow tolerate finding a task as it's workspace is being
closed, you'll have to guarantee that all operations complete before the
next one is processed.
It really does depend on what "efficiently" means here. I'd just use
locks and let the JVM optimize it. It's pretty good at that.
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Sebastian <sebastian@undisclosed.invalid> - 2011-05-06 22:07 +0200
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? markspace <-@.> - 2011-05-06 13:45 -0700
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Sebastian <sebastian@undisclosed.invalid> - 2011-05-07 11:43 +0200
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-07 07:59 -0400
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-07 12:49 -0400
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Sebastian <sebastian@undisclosed.invalid> - 2011-05-07 21:34 +0200
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-07 06:40 -0700
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-08 04:51 +0100
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-09 06:43 -0700
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-09 18:28 +0100
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Sebastian <sebastian@undisclosed.invalid> - 2011-05-09 22:57 +0200
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-09 18:36 -0400
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-10 08:34 +0100
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Sebastian <sebastian@undisclosed.invalid> - 2011-05-11 10:09 +0200
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Sebastian <sebastian@undisclosed.invalid> - 2011-05-11 10:51 +0200
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-11 04:55 -0700
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-11 09:00 -0400
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Sebastian <sebastian@undisclosed.invalid> - 2011-05-11 20:47 +0200
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? markspace <-@.> - 2011-05-07 09:35 -0700
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-05-09 16:42 +0200
Re: Concurrent bidirectional one-to-many map? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-05-07 03:46 -0700
csiph-web