# First whack at thread safe Containers **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [January 4, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/first-whack-at-thread-safe-containers/156877 "2009-01-04T19:57:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![flatekmonkey](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/f/e8c25b/32.png) [@flatekmonkey](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/flatekmonkey)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/first-whack-at-thread-safe-containers/156877/1 "2009-01-04T19:57:59Z")
Hi all Charly suggested thread safe containers some weeks ago. I finally found some time to try it, very much motivated by Jim W.'s Ruby Conf talk :-P. Please find my first implementation of a RWLock here [http://pastie.org/352321](http://pastie.org/352321) All comments welcome, but I am particularly interested, if monitor.rb or sync.rb have something to offer which might outperform ConditionVariable#wait & #signal? The algorithm itself is adapted from the 2nd edition of Java Threads (Scott Oaks and Heny Wong, I always confuse him with Harry Kim 😉 Thanx in advance Cheers Robert ---
**Author:** ![flatekmonkey](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/f/e8c25b/32.png) [@flatekmonkey](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/flatekmonkey)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 9:28pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/first-whack-at-thread-safe-containers/156877/2 "2009-01-04T21:28:33Z")
Hi all Charly suggested thread safe containers some weeks ago. I finally found some time to try it, very much motivated by Jim W.'s Ruby Conf talk :-P. Please find my first implementation of a RWLock here [http://pastie.org/352321](http://pastie.org/352321) All comments welcome, but I am particularly interested, if monitor.rb or sync.rb have something to offer which might outperform ConditionVariable#wait & #signal? The algorithm itself is adapted from the 2nd edition of Java Threads (Scott Oaks and Heny Wong, I always confuse him with Harry Kim 😉 Thanx in advance Cheers Robert – It is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be … ~ Isaac Asimov ---
**Author:** ![flatekmonkey](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/f/e8c25b/32.png) [@flatekmonkey](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/flatekmonkey)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2009, 4:58pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/first-whack-at-thread-safe-containers/156877/3 "2009-01-05T16:58:04Z")
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Charles Oliver N. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Looks good to me at a glance, but obviously Mentalguy is probably the best > one to talk to about impls like this. Are you essentially interested in > porting the java.util.concurrent libraries? You could certainly choose a > worse candidate for porting… > Thanx but the contrary is true too, nevertheless that sounds like a > nice challenge. After all I know I can count on help if I am stuck :). > I’d love to see that whole set of collections > and locking primitives available in Ruby. They could probably be simplified > and condensed/combined a bit too. > I will have a look. I was disconnected from the Java World for a long > time, but since it is open source now my attitude changed radically > :). > But at first I will try to get out a wrapper for the containers. > they were pure native. > Well I had a look at monitor, that is just one level too high for what > we need here, so I guess CV are about the right tool, but I am still > listening… > Note that in all recent versions of 1.8, 1.9, and JRuby, the old “thread.rb” > library has been replaced with Mentalguy’s fastthread library, so at least > those items should be solid and speedy already. > Thanx for the feedback. > Robert ---
**Author:** ![flatekmonkey](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/f/e8c25b/32.png) [@flatekmonkey](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/flatekmonkey)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2009, 12:36pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/first-whack-at-thread-safe-containers/156877/4 "2009-01-05T12:36:42Z")
Robert D. wrote: > Hi all > > Charly suggested thread safe containers some weeks ago. I finally > found some time to try it, very much motivated by Jim W.'s Ruby > Conf talk :-P. > > Please find my first implementation of a RWLock here > [http://pastie.org/352321](http://pastie.org/352321) Looks good to me at a glance, but obviously Mentalguy is probably the best one to talk to about impls like this. Are you essentially interested in porting the java.util.concurrent libraries? You could certainly choose a worse candidate for porting…I’d love to see that whole set of collections and locking primitives available in Ruby. They could probably be simplified and condensed/combined a bit too. > All comments welcome, but I am particularly interested, if monitor.rb > or sync.rb have something to offer which might outperform > ConditionVariable#wait & #signal? I’d say both are candidates for porting into native code directly (C, Java, etc). Given that people are more and more aware of how to do threaded code in Ruby, and given that these libraries are often going to be key to that effort, they really ought to be as screaming fast as possible. The current implementations are probably not slow, but definitely could be sped up if they were pure native. Note that in all recent versions of 1.8, 1.9, and JRuby, the old “thread.rb” library has been replaced with Mentalguy’s fastthread library, so at least those items should be solid and speedy already. - Charlie