yes, compared to using synchronized, this is a huge improvement
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
Hi,
have someone made some actual measures on performance of atomiclong
compared to old-style synchronization?
Sun stats
(http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2SE/concurrency/)
that Atomics are faster than the synchronized() block, but from the
implementation of some methods I would actually see some data:
/**
* Atomically increment by one the current value.
* @return the updated value
*/
public final long incrementAndGet() {
for (;;) {
long current = get();
long next = current + 1;
if (compareAndSet(current, next))
return next;
}
}
as far as I understand calling this function from 3 threads
simulatenously would end in running through this block 6 times. 10
Threads - 55 times. And so on. And this is still performant?
regards
Leon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Filip Hanik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
