sync.Map for caching

[bep]

sync.Map in Go 1.9 is a little low on examples/doc in the wild, so I thought I should ask here.

The new type is promoted as a replacement for  RWMutex in mostly read use cases with stable keys. I assume that a typical in memory cache would fit that description.

With RWMutex, if the cost of creating the cache item is high, I would maybe do something ala:

mu.RLock()
// Check cache
mu.RUnclock()

// Return if found

// If Not found:
mu.Lock()
defer mu.Unlock()
// Double check cache, return if found
// Create item and put in cache

I don't see how the above can be written with a sync.Map without adding a mutex.

bep

[Henrik Johansson]

If you absolutely must make sure you ever create 2 instances of any value in the map then I guess you have to lock.

Otherwise you can maybe use map.LoadOrStore? 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[snmed]

Hi 

Here are two examples how to achieve it: https://play.golang.org/p/wAtyGMSw6g or https://play.golang.org/p/EZWZUOpuwb

First example: In best cases it executes the creator function once and returns always the stored item, in bad cases it executes the creator function multiple times but returns always the first

stored item. 

Second example uses a lock to create and store the item.

If the creator function is expensive, then I would use the latter example otherwise the first.

Cheers snmed

[bep]

Thanks, snmed,

I was looking at LoadOrStore, but I was assuming that any func would be executed in any case.

A more illustrative running sample of your first example:

https://play.golang.org/p/vjlVu1GnUQ

Thanks again!

bep