From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UiUxT-0001JM-Sv for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 31 May 2013 19:25:51 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 209.85.128.44 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.128.44; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-qe0-f44.google.com; Received: from mail-qe0-f44.google.com ([209.85.128.44]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1UiUxR-0006mv-Vv for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 31 May 2013 19:25:51 +0000 Received: by mail-qe0-f44.google.com with SMTP id 6so1174279qeb.31 for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 12:25:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=OyJS+4e2P1xdKO7lFHdaubCpAfnn1lIc2ZZfmeXpWR4=; b=J1VU+9HAhzl8h2JTAMeOzM0xnulBbagQl9dngoLLy/8312bCSC+RKDNIPfo2wW2Crb qPEHKWQ6Vtl3LiiA0bUllOHMCZeo9HK+rcu1o6HDnY54pMwirBjRKLI+CFO7uHkz4Gdt DDOUUdKYIEvo66rXpRVjRY2upzC+2FSrSZP9sSLFDu/PBWkXnv2e0swgRtycKJCRqcHm AlXofqPc6C/bsKcsEex4RzE8vXlBZqzj/M3u8ay6hcsBI5jbmC0ZWSqxjUpEBEPhNLz2 OOa5W7aax1saJZ2D3xHCe6Um1DYmf6aMeXyA1VfiPWw0QrfPiL6m3Ppz0qEq8J6BQiEK 4iog== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.172.10 with SMTP id j10mr4125514qcz.27.1370028344384; Fri, 31 May 2013 12:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.2.102 with HTTP; Fri, 31 May 2013 12:25:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 15:25:44 -0400 Message-ID: From: Jeff Garzik To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rune_Kj=E6r_Svendsen?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlzzxFNpysUb9I26gBhdqWS2vvnBZ+7y4DpiwMDFo8G2yL4Qc2eXLilp4Ft4pdCC0P3l7P2 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1UiUxR-0006mv-Vv Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Implementing batch processing for -blocknotify X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 19:25:52 -0000 On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Rune Kj=E6r Svendsen = wrote: > I've thought about this as well. It just seems somewhat clunky to me. I'd > really prefer having bitcoind put out messages in batches, if it's doable= , > that is. > > I'd run into a lot of concurrency issues, as far as I can see, where I ca= n't > be sure that the queue isn't written to while, for example, it is opened = by > the program that needs to process the queue items. > > What if a disk operation takes a long time to finish, and a two queue > operations want to add to the queue simultaneously? This really brings > forward all the horrors of concurrent programming. This is not a compelling need to update bitcoind for this. The vast majority of systems are currently capable of processing a block, before another block arrives. As for parallel processing, your "what if" has been a solved problem for decade(s) now. --=20 Jeff Garzik Senior Software Engineer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/