IMHO the tone was quite annoying and overshadowed any good point the article could have about the complexity of proving concurrent algos.
But slightly on a tangent, re: the QuestDB algo, wouldn't hazard pointers solve the concurrent map problem in a cleaner way and avoid a globally contended reader counter?
But slightly on a tangent, re: the QuestDB algo, wouldn't hazard pointers solve the concurrent map problem in a cleaner way and avoid a globally contended reader counter?