Replacing monitors with locks

[Volkan Yazıcı]

Hello,

I interpreted the Quality Outreach Heads-up for the upcoming Java 23
<https://inside.java/2024/06/22/quality-heads-up/>, sharing improvements on
the way Loom handles monitors, as Loom will eventually handle monitors (in
particular, carrier thread pinning issues) decently and remove the need to
replace all `synchronized` usages with locks. Yet Attila Kelemen pointed in
a Log4j ticket
<https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/issues/1532#issuecomment-2221176844>
to this particular `loom-dev` post by Ron Pressler
<https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/2024-July/006885.html>:

*"Unfortunately, while monitors would no longer pin virtual threads, their
performance would suffer significantly when using virtual threads, and in
general we recommend using j.u.c locks in new code anyway, because that
implementation is likely to see further improvement, while monitors
probably won’t."*

Am I right to conclude that even though the monitors will eventually no
longer pin threads, replacing them with locks is still (and also will be so
for the foreseeable future?) the recommended practice for performance and
sustainability reasons?

Kind regards.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/attachments/20240711/60221202/attachment.htm>