You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to notifications@geode.apache.org by "pivotal-jbarrett (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2019/02/15 17:56:48 UTC

[GitHub] [geode] pivotal-jbarrett commented on pull request #3196: GEODE-6404: work around possible sync issue with computeIfAbsent

Do you have a JMH benchmark, or similar, that shows this is really an improvement? I think it is obviously an improvement if the entry is expected to be there for the vast majority of the calls. This will have a more negative impact though if the use case expects the entry to not be there. In that use case we go through the get path twice.

[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/3196 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org