peer.send() is not thread safe On Jan 7, 2013, at 6:39 PM, Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oh, > > Sure no problem. ;) > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:59 PM, realstolz.gmail <[email protected]> wrote: >> hi, Edward >> >> Thank for your reply~ >> >> Sorry for my confusing expression. >> My real question is >> 1. Is it safe to concurrently send messages by multiple threads using the >> same peer in one superstep (before calling sync()) >> 2. Is it safe to concurrently receive messages by multiple threads using the >> same peer in one superstep (after calling sync()) >> >> not the interleave between send and receive operation, they are independent >> questions. >> >> //In fact, I want use multithread in one peer process, but I'm not sure >> whether the current message manager is concurrently sate >> >> >> thanks, >> -Rong >> >> On Jan 7, 2013, at 5:45 PM, "Edward J. Yoon" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Nope, BSP tasks are synchronized by exchanging messages at barrier >>> synchronization step. It means that you should call sync() method >>> between send and getCurrentMessage(). >>> >>>> (BTW: I think the default setting for distributed version of message >>>> manager is HadoopMessageManagerImpl. Is it right?) >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:01 PM, realstolz.gmail <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I would like to know whether the message manager used by hama (distributed >>>> version) >>>> supports concurrently send and receive messages? >>>> Is it safe to concurrently call peer.send() and peer.getCurrentMessage() >>>> by multiple threads >>>> in distributed version? >>>> >>>> (BTW: I think the default setting for distributed version of message >>>> manager is HadoopMessageManagerImpl. Is it right?) >>>> >>>> thanks, >>>> -Rong >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon >>> @eddieyoon >> > > > > -- > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon > @eddieyoon
