Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
POWhat is the performance of boost::interprocess_mutex vs Win32 native mutexes?
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. POWhat is the performance of boost::interprocess_mutex vs Win32 native mutexes?
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>Note that I can conduct the research inside the boost source code, and may do this to answer my own curiosity if there isn't anyone out there with an answer.</p> <p>I do ask however because maybe someone has already done this comparison and can answer authoritatively?</p> <p>It would seem that creating a shared memory mapped file between processes, and through construction with <code>InterlockedIncrement()</code> one could create a largely usermode mutex akin to a <code>CRITICAL_SECTION</code>, which would be considerably more performant than the Win32 Mutex for interprocess synchronisation.</p> <p>So my expectation is that it may be probably for the implementation on Win32 of <code>boost::interprocess_mutex</code> to have been implemented in this manner, and for it to be substantially quicker than the native API offering.</p> <p>I only however have a supposition, I don't know through field testing what the performance of the <code>boost::interprocess_mutex</code> is for interprocess synchronisation, or deeply investigated its implementation.</p> <p>Does anyone have experience in using it or profiling its relative performance, or can they comment on using the safety of using InterlockedIncrement() across processes using shared memory?</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PTQuestion
    1. USpolyglot
    1. USpolyglot
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PL
      singulars
      1. LTLinked
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    2. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. POWhat is the performance of boost::interprocess_mutex vs Win32 native mutexes?
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. POWhat is the performance of boost::interprocess_mutex vs Win32 native mutexes?
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. POWhat is the performance of boost::interprocess_mutex vs Win32 native mutexes?
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COIf I understand your question, you seem to be asking is a critical section more efficient than a mutex (the answer is yes). If I'm misunderstanding, please rephrase your question.
      singulars
      1. POWhat is the performance of boost::interprocess_mutex vs Win32 native mutexes?
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    2. COA critical section cannot be created in shared memory between two processes, so it isn't a candidate mechanism for interprocess synchronisation.
      singulars
      1. POWhat is the performance of boost::interprocess_mutex vs Win32 native mutexes?
      1. USpolyglot
    3. CO@Neil - took your comments on board.
      singulars
      1. POWhat is the performance of boost::interprocess_mutex vs Win32 native mutexes?
      1. USpolyglot
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload