Author serhiy.storchaka
Recipients amaury.forgeotdarc, anacrolix, asvetlov, eric.snow, ezio.melotti, giampaolo.rodola, kachayev, meador.inge, pitrou, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka
Date 2012-12-22.21:00:59
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1356210060.73.0.913726011151.issue14373@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Antoine reminded me about a lock. In Python implementation it needed because linked list modifications are not atomic. In C implementation linked list modifications are atomic. However dict operations can call Python code and therefore they are not atomic. I don't know what bad things can happened with concurrent cache updating, however using lock will be safer and cheap enought.

Please add lock field to lru_cache_object and use it as in Python implementation. If no one can prove that a lock is not needed.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-12-22 21:01:01serhiy.storchakasetrecipients: + serhiy.storchaka, rhettinger, amaury.forgeotdarc, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, ezio.melotti, asvetlov, meador.inge, anacrolix, eric.snow, kachayev
2012-12-22 21:01:00serhiy.storchakasetmessageid: <1356210060.73.0.913726011151.issue14373@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2012-12-22 21:01:00serhiy.storchakalinkissue14373 messages
2012-12-22 21:00:59serhiy.storchakacreate