mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gaston Dombiak" <gas...@jivesoftware.com>
Subject RE: IoService question
Date Wed, 29 Nov 2006 01:32:32 GMT
Yep. That is why I used the *reduce* word. The AtomicLong is pretty
optimized from what I can tell by looking at the source code. Of course
doing something is more than doing nothing. ;) I'm not familiar with how
hard/strong MINA is already optimized or the policy for optimizations so
take my comment as coming from someone newbie. 

Regards,

  -- Gato

-----Original Message-----
From: Trustin Lee [mailto:trustin@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 5:24 PM
To: dev@mina.apache.org
Subject: Re: IoService question

On 11/28/06, Mark Webb <elihusmails@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That is what I was thinking.  the concurrent.atomic package is your
friend
> :)
>
> On 11/27/06, Gaston Dombiak <gaston@jivesoftware.com> wrote:
> > Hey Guys,
> >
> > I'm 100% new to MINA but if you are using Java 1.5 as a prerequisite
> > then you can try using AtomicLong or one of its sibling to reduce
> > performance impact and at the same time ensure a thread safe
solution.


I thought about that, but using AtomicLong doesn't mean that there's no
performance penalty.  We will have to do performance test.

Trustin
-- 
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP key fingerprints:
* E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41  4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E
* B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4  455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6

Mime
View raw message