Groups > comp.programming.threads > #2717

Re: About my scalable RWLocks

From	"Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.programming.threads
Subject	Re: About my scalable RWLocks
Date	2014-11-25 15:20 -0800
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<m532si$bj4$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<m53167$gio$2@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

> "Ramine"  wrote in message news:m53167$gio$2@dont-email.me... 

> [...]
> so i think that
> my scalable RWLocks can replace even RCU cause they are
> really scalable on read-mostly scenarios, and my scalable
> RWLocks can replace Seqlock cause Seqlock can livelock and
> can starve on scenario with many more writers...

FWIW, Seqlocks were simply NOT designed with a lot of writers in
mind. A lot of writers wrt RCU doesn't really cast terrible effects on
the read-side performance. Therefore, I do not really understand
your point for a Seqlock is not meant for a lot of writers!

If you came up with a rwlock that can beat RCU read side, well, then
you may have something neat here. Have you tested against a well
engineered RCU implementation? FWIW, I cannot beat RCU with
any traditional rwlock. A possible exception to this would be Dmitry
Vyukov's EXCELLENT asymmetric rwlock. However, this would hardly
be traditional!   ;^D


AFAICT, the key is in the clever asymmetry between readers and
writers...

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

Thread

About my scalable RWLocks Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-11-25 14:52 -0800
  Re: About my scalable RWLocks "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2014-11-25 15:20 -0800

csiph-web