You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 17, 2023. It is now read-only.
Currently there is no synchronization that prevents me from reading/writing/disposing a buffer at the same time from multiple threads. This could lead to race conditions where we crash or get corrupt data based on timing of the system. We should add some synchronization primitives to have atomic read/write/dispose methods.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Even though we discussed this in person, I'll reiterate what we decided here:
The current classes (Pointer, Pointer.Internal, and Pointer.External) are not thread safe on purpose, as I believe adding a mutex lock to every read/write would add unnecessary overhead for applications where thread safety is not a concern. I don't want to reduce performance just to cover a specific use case. With that said, I do believe it would be beneficial to add a new class called ProtectedPointer, or something like that, that does use a mutex internally to ensure thread safety.
Currently there is no synchronization that prevents me from reading/writing/disposing a buffer at the same time from multiple threads. This could lead to race conditions where we crash or get corrupt data based on timing of the system. We should add some synchronization primitives to have atomic read/write/dispose methods.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: