From: Giovanni Piero Deretta (gpderetta_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-11 12:10:36
On 6/11/07, Yigong Liu <yigongliu_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I haven't done any benchmark yet. I don't see why concurrency using the
> proposed Boost.Join library will be inherently "slower" than other
> implementations. I have implemented some of the optimizations mentioned in
> the Comega paper (implemented in Comega compiler) using template techniques.
> I believe there are still more im provements to be made. However considering
> how much resources Intel has put into optimizing TBB.... That is also why we
> propose libraries to the community / list for review so that more experts
> can have a look of the implementation and find the weakness.
>
AFAIK, Intel does use lock-free techniques heavily in its thread
library to wasting time on concurrency primitives, so I do not think
the current implementation of your library would compare favorably
with it. On the other hand, I do not see why the same techniques
couldn't be applied equally to your library.
You need to be an expert on lock free programming (which I am not) to
take advantage of it, and experts in this area are still uncommon, so
you may have an hard time optimizing your library.
gpd