On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Krukow wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sep 5, 8:18 pm, Rich Hickey wrote:
>> Given sufficient history, readers will not be retried due to the
>> activity of writers. It is true that while history is being
>> dynamically acquired there may be retries. Unless you have some
>> path
On Sep 5, 6:55 pm, Mark Volkmann wrote:
> I have lots of detail on this in my article
> athttp://ociweb.com/mark/stm/article.html.
Yes, it's bookmarked in the "TO READ" group :-) I just want to be
precise in my presentation.
> I'd say it means "block" as in wait until the other finishes.
Bu
On Sep 5, 8:18 pm, Rich Hickey wrote:
> Given sufficient history, readers will not be retried due to the
> activity of writers. It is true that while history is being
> dynamically acquired there may be retries. Unless you have some
> pathological transaction relationships, that history acquisi
On Sep 5, 10:30 am, Krukow wrote:
> I am digging somewhat into Clojure internals for a talk I'm doing. Now
> I've reached the LockingTransaction class, and have a few questions, I
> hope someone can answer.
>
> In some of the Clojure presentations it says that "Readers never
> impede writers/r
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Krukow wrote:
>
> I am digging somewhat into Clojure internals for a talk I'm doing. Now
> I've reached the LockingTransaction class, and have a few questions, I
> hope someone can answer.
I have lots of detail on this in my article at
http://ociweb.com/mark/stm/ar
