Skip to content

explore alternative impl for cycle handling #193

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
nikomatsakis opened this issue Sep 19, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

explore alternative impl for cycle handling #193

nikomatsakis opened this issue Sep 19, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
rfc-cycle-recovery Part of implementation for salsa-rs/salsa-rfcs#7.

Comments

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Member

In #147, I noted an alternative impl strategy for cycle handling that I wanted to explore:

Anyway, I also started a branch that was implemented a bit differently. What I was trying to do was to have each active query have an associated Arc with a pointer to the next active query on the stack (i.e., what it is blocked on). This way you could follow a chain of queries forward across threads pretty cleanly and lazily. I seem to recall that the code in this PR was a bit more complex -- but then I don't think I've looked at it since you rebased.

Filing this issue so I don't forget. Still hoping to explore this, but I'd also be happy to work with someone else on it.

@nikomatsakis

This comment has been minimized.

@nikomatsakis nikomatsakis added the rfc-cycle-recovery Part of implementation for salsa-rs/salsa-rfcs#7. label Sep 19, 2019
@carljm
Copy link
Contributor

carljm commented Feb 24, 2025

@nikomatsakis Is this still relevant after #603 ?

@Veykril
Copy link
Member

Veykril commented May 8, 2025

I believe we can close this now, the motivating comment is no longer relevant either

@Veykril Veykril closed this as completed May 8, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
rfc-cycle-recovery Part of implementation for salsa-rs/salsa-rfcs#7.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants