Unsynchronize xmlbean calls

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Unsynchronize xmlbean calls

kiwiwings
Hi,

does anyone mind, if we unsynchronize the xmlbean calls? [1]

Andi

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45082014/


signature.asc (495 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Unsynchronize xmlbean calls

Greg Woolsey
+1, and good find by the SO user.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 15:31 Andreas Beeker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> does anyone mind, if we unsynchronize the xmlbean calls? [1]
>
> Andi
>
> [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45082014/
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Unsynchronize xmlbean calls

Dominik Stadler
The basic guarantee that we make is that you can work with different
workbooks in separate threads concurrently.

We should keep that promise, so either this should still hold, or the
unsynchronized access is an option that the user can enable.

Dominik

On Jul 26, 2017 03:22, "Greg Woolsey" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1, and good find by the SO user.
>
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 15:31 Andreas Beeker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > does anyone mind, if we unsynchronize the xmlbean calls? [1]
> >
> > Andi
> >
> > [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45082014/
> >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Unsynchronize xmlbean calls

Yegor Kozlov-4
+1 to this change. It won't improve performance dramatically, but every
little bit helps.

>>We should keep that promise, so either this should still hold, or the
>>unsynchronized access is an option that the user can enable.

POI should be good to work with different workbooks from different threads
in the workbook-per-thread mode and setting XmlOptions#setUnsynchronized()
will not impact it. We can keep the current promise .  It was never a
promise to work with the same workbook or any part of it from multiple
threads and there is no point to introduce overhead on synchronization.

XmlBeans is very old-school and written back in times when default
synchronization was okay.  java.util.Vector are java.lang.StringBuffer are
examples of this style.


On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Dominik Stadler <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> The basic guarantee that we make is that you can work with different
> workbooks in separate threads concurrently.
>
> We should keep that promise, so either this should still hold, or the
> unsynchronized access is an option that the user can enable.
>
> Dominik
>
> On Jul 26, 2017 03:22, "Greg Woolsey" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > +1, and good find by the SO user.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017, 15:31 Andreas Beeker <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > does anyone mind, if we unsynchronize the xmlbean calls? [1]
> > >
> > > Andi
> > >
> > > [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45082014/
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Loading...