| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | Italy | |
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 3 months |
| seen | May 15 at 12:35 | |
| stats | profile views | 52 |
|
Apr 13 |
revised |
How to find local maxima in matrices? added details |
|
Apr 13 |
asked | How to find local maxima in matrices? |
|
Mar 10 |
asked | Generate all possible combinations of N elements from a set of M elements |
|
Mar 6 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Sep 5 |
accepted | How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? |
|
Aug 27 |
revised |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? added link |
|
Aug 27 |
revised |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? added example |
|
Aug 27 |
revised |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? Based on the answers, I wrote an algorithm to prevent mutual acceptance of a login request. |
|
Aug 27 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Aug 24 |
comment |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? Ok, but the deadlock could occur if the connection request is not asynchronous, and if it is performed inside the critical section: in this case, the node can not leave the mutex until its connection request has been accepted. Otherwise I should perform the lock on the list only to add (or remove) a node: in this case I should check for duplicate connections, etc.. Finally, another option would be to send an asynchronous connection request. |
|
Aug 24 |
revised |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? added details |
|
Aug 24 |
comment |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? However, I still have to lock on the list every time a new (incoming or outgoing) connection is created, since other threads may access this list, then the problem of deadlock would still remain. |
|
Aug 23 |
comment |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? The problem is also that the node receiving the request can not reject the connection, but it would remain in wait indefinitely to get the lock on the list. |
|
Aug 23 |
revised |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? added details |
|
Aug 23 |
revised |
How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? added details |
|
Aug 23 |
asked | How could I avoid a distributed deadlock during a mutual connection between two nodes? |
|
Aug 18 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Aug 18 |
accepted | Best way to load application settings |
|
Aug 16 |
comment |
Best way to load application settings Basically each module could expect a certain type of configuration (such as the HelloWorldConfiguration object shown in the example you provided). |
|
Aug 16 |
comment |
Best way to load application settings This could also be a good idea: a class that loads the values of the settings may have to deal only to load the values from the configuration file, that is, its responsibility could only be the one to load the values from the configuration file; instead each module (which use some settings) will have the responsibility to validate the values. |