Groups > comp.programming.threads > #1605

Re: Lockfreee algorithms...

Path	csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	"Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.programming.threads, comp.programming
Subject	Re: Lockfreee algorithms...
Date	Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:24:45 -0700
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines	16
Message-ID	<kq2gb1$8v9$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<kq2dje$dc7$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host	PomiWpvG4e2y0HvOhU0dhw.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Complaints-To	abuse@aioe.org
X-MimeOLE	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308
X-Notice	Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-Newsreader	Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308
Importance	Normal
X-Priority	3
X-MSMail-Priority	Normal
Xref	csiph.com comp.programming.threads:1605 comp.programming:3507

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

> "aminer"  wrote in message news:kq2dje$dc7$1@dont-email.me... The problem 
> is worse with lockfree algorithms , i said
> before that they can higher the contention, and they can
> be slow when there is more retries, Hence lockfree algorithms
> are not perfectly scalable,  and more than that read the
> following:


IMVHO, this is total non-sense. You say a distributed rwmutex is better than
lock-free; see the problem here? What about distributed lock-free...

Anyway, you seem to think as if locking protocols are the only thing that
can be engineered to scale.

;^/

Back to comp.programming.threads | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Lockfreee algorithms... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-06-21 14:24 -0700
  Re: Lockfreee algorithms... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2013-06-21 22:03 -0700

csiph-web