Re: Data structure to keep things in memory
"ClassCastException" <zjkg3d9gj56@gmail.invalid> wrote in message
news:icv9de$3u0$1@news.eternal-september.org...
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 10:12:51 -0800, Mike Schilling wrote:
"ClassCastException" <zjkg3d9gj56@gmail.invalid> wrote in message
news:icta6n$av9$2@news.eternal-september.org...
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 01:56:40 -0800, Mike Schilling wrote:
"ClassCastException" <zjkg3d9gj56@gmail.invalid> wrote in message
news:ict651$av9$1@news.eternal-september.org...
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 00:09:40 -0800, Mike Schilling wrote:
Without going into all the details, I have the following situation:
There are a set of objects RTS, all of the same type, that gather
run-time statistics about the running of a program. Various related
objects with different lifecycles pass them around and use them.
I'm interested in when each member of RTS is no longer being
updated, because I want to collect its final statistics , but
there's no good way to tell when it's no longer in use except via
its collection, so when it's created I attach a weak reference to it
and associate the weak reference with a queue. When the reference
is delivered, I record the statistics. [1]
So far so good. The question is, what's the best way to keep the
references in memory until they can be delivered to the queue?
Obviously, I could put them into a synchronized HashSet, but I'd
prefer to optimize for concurrency by minimizing locking. At the
moment, I'm using a ConcurrentHashMap, since it seems to give the
best concurrency for updates. (The usage pattern is a bit unusual,
since there are effectively no lookups. There's a put() when the
reference is created, and a remove() when it's pulled out of the
reference queue.) This is an area where I have very little
experience, so I'd welcome input from anyone who's worked with these
classes.
1. Obviously, a member of RTS points to a separate statistics object
which is also pointed to by the weak reference.
The RTS object won't be collected, and so won't end up on the
reference queue, if it's held in a hashmap.
Isn???t it clear that it's the *references* that are in the Map?
Not from his post, it wasn't.
The question is, what's the best way to keep the ***references*** in
memory until they can be delivered to the queue? Obviously, I could
put them into a synchronized HashSet
I see a lot of quoted text but no original text.
There was no need for new text, because it was all explained in the original
post.
In particular, I *don't*
see any addressing of the following point:
"He only mentioned RTSs and WeakReferences in particular. If he just had
RTSs and WeakReference<RTS>s, he had a problem either way: if the RTSs
are in the map the WeakReferences never get enqueued, and if they're not,
by the time one's enqueued the associated RTS object is gone
irretrievably.
That is, the problem handled by
1. Obviously, a member of RTS points to a separate statistics object
which is also pointed to by the weak reference.