Paul J. Reder wrote:
>Brian Pane wrote:
>
[...]
>>Also, the documentation
>>that Paul posted mentions the option of using per-process or
>>per-worker locking; that might offer sufficiently small granularity,
>>depending on what specifically your modules are doing with the
>>scoreboard.
>>--Brian
>>
>
>Again, this is a possibility, *if* performance requires it. Using
>finer granularity locking adds complexity to the code. I would
>discourage moving to this unless the current scheme proves to be
>a problem.
>
I'm fundamentally in agreement. My point was not that finer-grained
locking is inherently necessary, but rather that the ability of your
design to support finer-grained locking refutes Ryan's theoretical
concern about locking being a fundamental bottleneck.
--Brian
