If you need synchronization solely for the purpose of incrementing,
decrementing, comparing, and/or exchanging values then the Interlocked
routines are probably what you want. I'm not sure what you mean by them "not
going into a wait state" -- they guarantee atomic operation so if two threads
try to perform an interlocked operation on the same variable concurrently,
one of them must block until the other finishes its interlocked operation!
Otherwise the lock(object o) {...} construct (based on the Monitor class)
seems pretty good. Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by "something a
bit faster" than mutexes? Have you determined that the Mutex class is a
bottleneck in your application? What latency are you seeing between one
thread releasing a Mutex and a blocked thread coming out its wait on the
Mutex? What is the cost of calling WaitOne on an unowned Mutex?
I guess I would be a little surprised if the Mutex operations were really so
heavyweight that you would notice.
-- Tom
"scott" wrote:
iv got a multithreaded program and need to use thread synchronization. The
synchronization does not have to work across multiple processes just the
one. I was wondering if any one new which one used the least overhead. Im
at current using mutexes but was wondering if there was something a bit
faster.
Iv looked at the Interlocked class and that seemed to do almost everything i
wanted but one thing. From looking at sample code it did not seem to go
into a wait state.
