+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56797
--- Comment #3 from Christopher Schultz ---
Aw, crap. I missed that, obviously. It's always easier to run a unit test when
it comes in a self-contained example. ;)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56798
--- Comment #5 from Christopher Schultz ---
(In reply to Sebb from comment #3)
> (In reply to Christopher Schultz from comment #2)
>
> > Using a
> > LIFO structure does in fact mean that the whole pool will stay "hot"
> > regardless of how
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56798
--- Comment #6 from Chuck Caldarale ---
The contention issue is a red herring. Both a queue and a stack will normally
have to be completely locked when inserting or removing items, since there may
only be zero or one entries in the contain
10 matches
Mail list logo
