Browse thread
Where's my non-classical shared memory concurrency technology?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Jon Harrop <jon@f...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Re: Where's my non-classical shared memory concurrency technology? |
On Wednesday 28 May 2008 12:18:37 Damien Doligez wrote: > On 2008-05-27, at 11:34, Martin Berger wrote: > >>> Here I disagree. Shared memory concurrency is a specific form > >>> of message passing: Writing to a memory cell is in fact sending > >>> a message to that cell carrying two items, the new value and a > >>> return channel that is used to inform the writer that sending > >>> has succeeded, and likewise for reading. > > [...] > > > But broadcasting is a form of message-passing too! > > That wasn't my point. My point was that there is no return channel. > If you want to know when your write is done, you have to use a lock > or a memory barrier. Both are very expensive. Very expensive compared to what? -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?e