RE: Semaphore action

IgniteFuture extended JUC's Future! Is there any particular reason it doesn't? Regards Andrey > Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 14:28:24 +0300 > Subject: Re: Semaphore action > From: yzhda...@apache.org > To: dev@ignite.apache.org > > I like the idea. Couple of comments though. > &

Re: Semaphore action

Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2016 10:27 AM > Subject: RE: Semaphore action > To: <dev@ignite.apache.org> > > >Vladisav, > > It would be great if you could implement the enhancements! > > And while we're at it, here's something else

Re: Semaphore action

Andrey Kornev <andrewkor...@hotmail.com> > > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2016 10:27 AM > > Subject: RE: Semaphore action > > To: <dev@ignite.apache.org> > > > > > >Vladisav, > > > > It would be great if you c

RE: Semaphore action

Just to clarify, 7.4 below refers to GridGain 7.4, which is Ignite 1.4. _ From: Andrey Kornev <andrewkor...@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2016 10:27 AM Subject: RE: Semaphore action To: <dev@ignite.apache.org>

RE: Semaphore action

icient, reduces the pressure on Ignite's thread pools and prevents thread starvation, and so on. Regards Andrey > Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2016 10:40:53 +0100 > Subject: Re: Semaphore action > From: vladis...@gmail.com > To: dev@ignite.apache.org > > It does sounds like a useful a

Re: Semaphore action

Andrey, In general this seems like a good addition. However, I do not understand how you can specify an executor, given that execution could happen remotely. Can you please clarify? D. On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Andrey Kornev wrote: > Hi there, > > The

Semaphore action

Hi there, The Semaphore feature was a great addition to Ignite's synchronization primitive toolkit. I'd like to propose an enhancement to make Semaphore API even more useful. My biggest complaint about the current API is its blocking nature. For example, the only way to acquire a permit is by