Probably wouldn't perform well distributed. It does a lot of fine grained updates which would be expensive over a network. Distributed algorithms generally try to do as much locally as possible and minimize cross node chatter. Might be an interesting experiment though. Then maybe come up with variations that improve it.
Cheers, Steve On Oct 8, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Fernando Padilla wrote: > Good to hear. > > As an aside. I was wondering how the "Lock-free Hash Table" from the > Azul guys behaved in Terracotta? Have you guys heard of it? It just > sounds like a map made for massive multi-thread access, and Terracotta > would go well together. > > > http://blogs.azulsystems.com/cliff/2007/03/a_nonblocking_h.html > http://72.14.253.104/search? > q=cache:um30fXUqFkgJ:www.azulsystems.com/events/ > javaone_2007/2007_LockFreeHash.pdf+non+blocking+hash > +map&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a > > > Steven Harris wrote: >> For those who play with nightly builds their has been some >> significant improvement made to clustered ConcurrentHashMap in trunk. >> It now takes advantage of read locks and partial values. Please give >> it a try and let us know how it works for you. >> >> Cheers, >> Steve >> >> _______________________________________________ >> tc-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev > _______________________________________________ > tc-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-users _______________________________________________ tc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.terracotta.org/mailman/listinfo/tc-dev
