From: "Neill Clift [MS]" <nei...@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 10:28:24 -0800
Local: Wed, Jan 9 2002 1:28 pm
Subject: Re: InitializeCriticalSectionAndSpinCount
I am trying to get the best tradeoff here I can. It was really
impossible to handle exceptions generated by
EnterCriticalSection and LeaveCriticalSection because
they left the CS in a state you couldn't recover from.
This forced apps that wanted to be robust into using
preallocation. We really want all apps to be robust so
removing the raise was my top priority. I was left with a large
number of internal apps using this flag and the associated memory
usage did have an effect on the memory footprint. I therefore decided
to ignore this flag. My reasoning is that any app getting the global
object is getting it because its under memory pressure. Performance
will be poor in this case anyway. I want to be robust in preference to
performance in this out of memory case. I chose to ignore the flag
because it helps a great deal with memory footprint. There is of course
a one time penalty when we allocate the event but its not a great deal
of time in comparison to waiting anyway. I don't really believe the
difference between just waiting and allocating an event and waiting is
"Daniel Lohmann" <dan...@uni-koblenz.de> wrote in messagenews:firstname.lastname@example.org...
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 16:16:52 -0800, "Neill Clift [MS]"
> <nei...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> >The idea behind setting the upper bit of the spin count is
> However, this has also the drawback of getting things still more
> (I know that NT is not a hard realtime system. However, it is
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.