On Jun 20, 2008, at 10:41 PM, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
- the JavaDoc explained *why* the synchronization is there and what it is supposed to do and how the client is supposed to use it.
From the class JavaDocs: "A synchronized list that serves as a container of DataObjects"... A Collection is either synchronized or not. No other explanation is needed.
Now regarding the synchronization scope, my current POV (that is somewhat different from my past opinion) is that the list methods should NOT be synchronized by default (i.e. users should create synchronized wrappers if they need to). This way IncrementalFaultList will be aligned with standard Java collections. One thing that still must be synchronized internally is the DB operations to avoid multiple concurrent fetches of the same data. This does not require synchronization of most normal list access methods. I.e. the scope of synchronization should be significantly reduced. (We can do something extra fancy with syncing DB ops per page to allow parallel page faulting, but that's certainly not a very high priority task).
Now your mention of performance issues... My guess without looking at the code, this is unlikely to happen due to oversynchronization. Compared to other things that are going on, synchronization overhead should be negligible. Of course running in profiler should answer that for sure.
Finally thanks for opening CAY-1075. One request - could you submit any code as patches instead of full files - it will make it much easier to analyze the changes.
Andrus
