On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 1:05:12 AM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>
> That's inherently racy, though. It's quite normal to have multiple
> goroutines reading from the same socket. That is awkward if we split
> up WaitRead and Read. Better to have a single wait-then-read
> operation, as we do today.
>
I might not understand the racy part completely. Could you please explain a
bit more what would be wrong if multiple goroutines read from the same
Reader? Is it when multiple goroutines will be woken up by WaitRead but
then we don't know which one will actually Read?
An alternative solution without introducing any new API could be that we
somehow specify the behavior of Read(buf) when len(buf) == 0, so multiple
goroutines can just do
r.Read(nil) // all goroutine blocked here till r is readable
buf := bufPool.Get().([]byte) // get buf from sync.Pool
r.Read(buf) // actual read here
process(buf)
bufPool.Put(buf) // return buf to pool
This style should in theory avoid the racy question, right?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
