It is also entirely possible that I am looking at this all wrong, in
which case I kindly request guidance.
I apologize for being too terse. By "storage", I mean in-memory only
data structures. For example, I have multiple async calls adding items
to the same queue, then one reader deq'ing them out for synchronous
processing. I could ensure thread-safety by moving this structure to
SQL, but doesn't this seem too heavy-weight?
:DG<
On 11/10/07, Aaron Boodman <a....@google.com> wrote:
I don't understand -- the only storage that is accessible to multiple
threads is the database, and it is inherently thread-safe. Can you
give a little more background on what you're trying to do?
- a
On 11/10/07, Dimitri Glazkov <dimi...@gmail.com> wrote:
I was wondering what team's thoughts are on introducing some sort of
thread-safe storage as part of the WorkerPool module? I could've
really used a thread-safe queue (rwl lock, or spin-lock, whichever)
right now. Though I am getting by with a good ole Array for the
moment, it seems like this type of functionality would be a natural
extension of Gears capabilities.
You know what they say: if you do a-splittin', you gots to do a-muxing.
:DG<
3 messages in com.googlegroups.google-gearsRe: Thread-safe Array/Queue/Stack