[Seaside] Re: Are Collections threadsafe?

Philippe Marschall philippe.marschall at gmail.com
Wed Feb 27 06:12:03 UTC 2008

2008/2/27, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>:
> goran at krampe.se wrote:
>  > I didn't imply the problems have been undetected - I just meant that
>  > they have gone undetected for a looong time. And most users deploy stuff
>  > with Squeak and do just fine. That is all I am saying.
> The real trouble is that some of the people (like Philippe) that are
>  closest to the point of the problem end up complaining in general
>  instead of gathering valuable data. Basically it's all flawed logic of
>  the form "clearly, our code can't possibly be wrong so the VM must be
>  broken and why don't you guys just get your act together and fix it".
>  What people *really* need to do in such a situation is to gather as much
>  data as possible. If you can still save the image, save it. If you can
>  still get a bunch of stack traces, get them. Attach gdb to the VM and do
>  a printAllStacks() - this is probably the most important information you
>  get in a situation like this (at Qwaq, we have hooked this up to a USR1
>  signal so that when we need to restart the servers we first get a full
>  stack trace and then restart the images just in case).
>  Once you have gathered all that information, post it to Squeak-dev.
>  There are actually people out there who care about it. They just don't
>  care very much about editorial comments of the form "TEH SQUEAK SUCKZ!".
>  If you want a solution, then provide the input that helps other people
>  resolving your problem. The short form of that equation is:
>    complaints == no data
>    no data == no solution
>  And if you keep this in mind (and your frustration to a minimum) you
>  will likely find that *with* data the probability of actually fixing
>  your problems goes up dramatically.


>  > Of course we should fix it. But we should also not scare people into
>  > thinking that Semaphores are *totally* broken and that Squeak is total
>  > crap when it comes to concurrency. :)
> Absolutely. At Qwaq, we routinely run servers with hundreds of
>  concurrent connections piping through gigabytes of data per day.
>  Cheers,
>    - Andreas
> _______________________________________________
>  seaside mailing list
>  seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
>  http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

More information about the seaside mailing list