On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
> > There is already an Apache project to "avoid shared memory to make
> > application that exploit parallelism easier". That is Hadoop
> (especially
> > with Pig).
>
> Certainly Hadoop has a place -- it implements a scatter/gather
> framewo
Ted,
On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 12:39 -0800, Ted Dunning wrote:
> I know that this isn't where you are going with your comment, but I think it
> actually meets the spirit of what you are trying to do, just in a more
> revolutionary way than you specify.
Yes and no, but that is a debate for elsewhere
Hi Russel,
> At the heart of all the problems is shared memory. Perhaps it is worth
> challenging the use of shared memory models for application programming;
> perhaps it is worth building new APIs that avoid shared memory in order
> to make application that exploit parallelism easier for the a
10:36 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [lang] Concurrency utils for JDK 1.5+ version
I guess I understand the thinking here, but not within the context of
commons lang. It sounds like you might want to start a new sandbox
project for this.
However, if I was doing this I would look
24, 2009 10:36 AM
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [lang] Concurrency utils for JDK 1.5+ version
I guess I understand the thinking here, but not within the context of
commons lang. It sounds like you might want to start a new sandbox
project for this.
However, if I was doing this I
I know that this isn't where you are going with your comment, but I think it
actually meets the spirit of what you are trying to do, just in a more
revolutionary way than you specify.
There is already an Apache project to "avoid shared memory to make
application that exploit parallelism easier".
I guess I understand the thinking here, but not within the context of
commons lang. It sounds like you might want to start a new sandbox
project for this.
However, if I was doing this I would look for ways to abstract things
so that what the application programmers deal with are very abstra
I think this is a good idea, but it obviously has to be on a new
branch since 1.5 would be the minimum version. I also think a lot of
the existing classes should be revisited in light of what is now
available in the JDK.
On Jan 24, 2009, at 8:37 AM, Oliver Heger wrote:
Since Java 1.5 ther
On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 17:37 +0100, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Since Java 1.5 there is a lot of functionality in the area of thread
> synchronization and multi-threaded programming. However, there are
> certainly still missing features or APIs that could be improved or made
> easier to use.
>
> How a
