Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #30983

Re: Concurrency question?

Show key headers only | View raw

On 1/31/2015 10:51 PM, Knute Johnson wrote:
> On 01/31/2015 12:42 PM, Eric Sosman wrote:
>> On 1/31/2015 2:20 PM, Volker Borchert wrote:
>>> Knute Johnson wrote:
>>>> So I have a Map<Integer,String> [ ... ]
>>>>
>>>> Do you see any holes in my logic?  Any suggestions?
>>>
>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap<K,V>
>>
>>      That's fine if the consistency criterion involves only single
>> mappings.  But if different mappings within the same Map must "agree"
>> (in some application-dependent sense), atomicity of individual updates
>> isn't good enough.
>>
>>      Only Knute knows for sure ...
>>
>
> When I first saw Volker's suggestion I thought, no I can't iterate over
> the map without some other synchronization but I looked into the
> ConcurrentHashMap docs and found;
>
> "Similarly, Iterators, Spliterators and Enumerations return elements
> reflecting the state of the hash table at some point at or since the
> creation of the iterator/enumeration. They do not throw
> ConcurrentModificationException. However, iterators are designed to be
> used by only one thread at a time."
>
> As subtle as his suggestion was, I think he may be on to something.  I'm
> going to think about it some more but Volker may have the simplest
> solution.

     Hmmm: I still don't think the table's own consistency guarantees are
necessarily strong enough for every application.  For example, consider
a situation where the map expresses a "symmetric" relation where keys
and values are of the same type, and if A -> B then also B -> A.  It
takes two operations to create the two mappings, and if the updating
thread gets interrupted between the two the fact that the reader sees
a consistent-from-the-table's-viewpoint state may be of small comfort.

     So, again: I think it's up to you to figure out what "consistency"
means for your application.  If ConcurrentHashMap's properties provide
what you need, wonderful!  (And I thank you and Volker for teaching me
that its properties extend further than I'd thought!)  But it's not
hard to imagine circumstances that require stronger guarantees than
CHM provides.  "Only Knute knows for sure ..."

-- 
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid
"Don't be afraid of work. Make work afraid of you." -- TLM

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Concurrency question? Knute Johnson <nospam@rabbitbrush.frazmtn.com> - 2015-01-31 10:34 -0800
  Re: Concurrency question? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-01-31 14:04 -0500
    Re: Concurrency question? Knute Johnson <nospam@rabbitbrush.frazmtn.com> - 2015-01-31 11:23 -0800
  Re: Concurrency question? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-01-31 14:12 -0500
    Re: Concurrency question? Knute Johnson <nospam@rabbitbrush.frazmtn.com> - 2015-01-31 11:33 -0800
  Re: Concurrency question? v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2015-01-31 19:20 +0000
    Re: Concurrency question? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-01-31 15:42 -0500
      Re: Concurrency question? Knute Johnson <eternal@knutejohnson.com> - 2015-01-31 19:51 -0800
        Re: Concurrency question? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2015-02-01 09:24 -0500
  Re: Concurrency question? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2015-01-31 22:59 -0800
    Re: Concurrency question? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-02-01 12:55 -0500
      Re: Concurrency question? Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2015-02-01 22:19 +0100
      Re: Concurrency question? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2015-02-06 22:29 -0800
        Re: Concurrency question? Knute Johnson <eternal@knutejohnson.com> - 2015-02-07 10:14 -0800
        Re: Concurrency question? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2015-02-08 19:33 +0100
  Re: Concurrency question? olupot douglas <olupotd3@gmail.com> - 2015-02-07 01:06 -0800
  Re: Concurrency question? Haddock <ffm2002@web.de> - 2015-02-16 06:32 -0800

csiph-web