On Sun, Feb 5, 2023, 4:34 AM Juliusz Chroboczek <j...@irif.fr> wrote:
> >> I took some time to put this to a test. The Go program here > >> https://go.dev/play/p/378Zn_ZQNaz uses a VERY short holding of the > >> lock - but a large % of runtime holding the lock. > > > Thanks for the benchmark. You're right: if you have hundreds of > > goroutines doing nothing but acquiring a read lock, then an RWMutex > > can be faster. They key there is that there are always multiple > > goroutines waiting for the lock. > > Could you please explain that? You previously implied that the > required atomic operation is going to make the difference between the > two kinds of mutex irrelevant, why does the argument not apply here? > If there are enough concurrent lockers to overwhelm the plain mutex spin lock, then the read-write mutex will work better. My argument is that in real programs that is an unlikely case if the lock is held for a short period of time. Ian > -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAOyqgcXoO1ajdM-wXoFiqR3joxzxiHOe2vXgya43xAs2%3Dd-xJw%40mail.gmail.com.
