[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-514?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16806277#comment-16806277
]
Cameron McKenzie commented on CURATOR-514:
------------------------------------------
The fix looks fine to me. I'm just wondering what the normal use case for the
QueueSharder is? I would have expected that each client of the queue would tend
to be in a separate JVM, in which case the Random doesn't have the contention
issues. I guess there's no harm in the change though.
> Utilize ThreadLocalRandom In QueueSharder
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: CURATOR-514
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-514
> Project: Apache Curator
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Recipes
> Affects Versions: 4.2.0
> Reporter: David Mollitor
> Priority: Minor
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> bq. When applicable, use of ThreadLocalRandom rather than shared Random
> objects in concurrent programs will typically encounter much less overhead
> and contention.
> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ThreadLocalRandom.html
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
