Question about AsynchronousByteChannel.read()

[cowwoc]

On 19/07/2011 10:45 AM, Alan Bateman-2 [via nio-dev] wrote:
> cowwoc wrote:
> >
> >     ... How so? If we queue incoming requests, only one operation runs
> > at a time. Completion handlers are guaranteed to return in the order
> > in which they were submitted. Am I missing something?
> If by "return" you mean execute then there isn't any guarantee. Even
> today if you initiate two read operations in quick succession, and if
> you specify two different completion handlers that just print a trace
> message, then it's possible that they the trace messages will not be
> printed in the order that you expect.
>
> -Alan.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the 
> discussion below:
> http://nio-dev.3157472.n2.nabble.com/Question-about-AsynchronousByteChannel-read-tp6570959p6599032.html 
>
> To unsubscribe from Question about AsynchronousByteChannel.read(), 
> click here 
> <http://nio-dev.3157472.n2.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=6570959&code=Y293d29jQGJicy5kYXJrdGVjaC5vcmd8NjU3MDk1OXwxNTc0MzIxMjQ3>. 
>

     Don't I get to make that guarantee as the Channel implementer? I 
can use a single consumer thread for reads, thereby guaranteeing that 
requests will be honored in the order they are submitted.

Gili


--
View this message in context: http://nio-dev.3157472.n2.nabble.com/Question-about-AsynchronousByteChannel-read-tp6570959p6599194.html
Sent from the nio-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/attachments/20110719/dae71158/attachment.html