[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.
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2007-December/123045.html
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2007-December/123508.html
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2007-December/123498.html
> > 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