[Seaside] Are Collections threadsafe?

[Philippe Marschall]

2008/2/25, goran at krampe.se <goran at krampe.se>:
> Hi again!
>
>
>  Malte Zacharias <malte.zacharias at nordakademie.de> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the prompt answer.=20
>
> >
>  > But in what way are Semaphores broken? Completely or are there certain
>
> > cirumstances that need to be avoided?=20
>
> > I have to admit, I am quite surprised to hear that. Is the same true for
>  > seaside-mini.image and/or squeak web-dev image?
>
>
> Let me just say that Semaphore and Monitor have been around and used a
>  LOT - and I mean, LOT LOT LOT.
>
>  So saying that these things are "broken" is an overstatement. :) Sure,
>  we have discovered some issues - but we are talking things that have
>  gone undetected a loooong time.

Not undetected. They do show up in production. We had for example once
a problem with a db connection pool that was protected by a Semaphore.
Whether it worked or not depended on the priority of the thread
accessing it. But of course implying there is something wrong with the
VM or Image is considered heresy. If you have such issues, better just
fix them yourself. This is easy because "the source it there" (tm). It
was probably done intentionally so that you could expand your
Smalltalk knowledge.

Cheers
Philippe

>  IMHO - while you can learn something from digging into these discussions
>  and patches, you could also just move along and use a Monitor (or
>  Semaphore - but a Monitor is probably "smarter") and be done with it.
>
>
>  regards, Göran
>  _______________________________________________
>  seaside mailing list
>  seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
>  http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
>