In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> >> I just need confirmation that the current implementation in FPC is
> >> incorrect though.
> >
> > It's not incorrect, just inefficient.
>
> I have to disagree. The currently class name is
> TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer. The currently
Vinzent Höfler wrote:
> Graeme Geldenhuys :
>
>> I have a corrected TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer
>> implementation (don't worry, not based on Delphi implementation)
>> that I can donate to FPC.
>
> I hope it isn't based on the Delphi one. Last time I heard the Delphi
> implementation suff
In our previous episode, Florian Klaempfl said:
> > (don't worry, not based on Delphi implementation) that I can donate to
> > FPC. I just need confirmation that the current implementation in FPC is
> > incorrect though.
>
> If you have a better for unix this will be fine. IIRC it is not easy (if
Florian Klaempfl :
> If you have a better for unix this will be fine. IIRC it is not easy (if
> possible after all?) to implement TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer
> for unix systems.
It's possible, yes. If it's possible in an efficient way, is another question.
Vinzent.
--
GRATIS für alle
Graeme Geldenhuys :
> I have a corrected TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer implementation
> (don't worry, not based on Delphi implementation) that I can donate to
> FPC.
I hope it isn't based on the Delphi one. Last time I heard the Delphi
implementation suffers from occasional dead locks.
S
Jonas Maebe schrieb:
>
> On 28 Aug 2009, at 10:35, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
>
>> If you have a better for unix this will be fine. IIRC it is not easy (if
>> possible after all?) to implement TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer
>> for unix systems.
>
> What's wrong with these routines: pthread_rw
On 28 Aug 2009, at 10:35, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
If you have a better for unix this will be fine. IIRC it is not easy
(if
possible after all?) to implement TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer
for unix systems.
What's wrong with these routines: pthread_rwlock_init,
pthread_rwlock_rdlock/
Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> The current TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer as implemented in FPC
> 2.3.1 is wrong. It use Critical Sections in a standard way which means
> it blocks all other threads while one thread is doing a Read. This is
> wrong. It is a MULTI read, SINGLE write sy
Hi,
The current TMultiReadExclusiveWriteSynchronizer as implemented in FPC
2.3.1 is wrong. It use Critical Sections in a standard way which means
it blocks all other threads while one thread is doing a Read. This is
wrong. It is a MULTI read, SINGLE write synchronizer. So it must only
block other
