[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: concurrency suggestions for Gnus
|
From: |
Miles Bader |
|
Subject: |
Re: concurrency suggestions for Gnus |
|
Date: |
Tue, 08 Feb 2011 13:31:39 +0900 |
Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden> writes:
> Tom> If we went the "lock anything" route, I would suggest a weak hash table
> Tom> for locks, instead of putting the lock into the object.
>
> A bloom filter would guarantee no false negatives, which as you noted is
> the vast majority of the cases, requires very little space per element
A bloom filter...?!
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/pubs/1995/SSZG95.html
-miles
--
Bigot, n. One who is obstinately and zealously attached to an opinion that
you do not entertain.
Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer', Daniel Colascione, 2011/02/01
Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer', Daniel Colascione, 2011/02/01
- Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer', Tom Tromey, 2011/02/06
- concurrency suggestions for Gnus (was: Patch for fields of `struct buffer'), Ted Zlatanov, 2011/02/07
- Re: concurrency suggestions for Gnus,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: concurrency suggestions for Gnus, Andy Moreton, 2011/02/08
- Re: concurrency suggestions for Gnus, Justin Lilly, 2011/02/08
- bloom filters (was: concurrency suggestions for Gnus), Ted Zlatanov, 2011/02/08
- bloom filters (was: concurrency suggestions for Gnus), Stephen J. Turnbull, 2011/02/08
Re: concurrency suggestions for Gnus, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2011/02/10
Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer', Stephen J. Turnbull, 2011/02/01
Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer', Stefan Monnier, 2011/02/01