CodexBloom - Programming Q&A Platform

implementing lifetime issues while implementing a concurrent Rust application using `tokio` and `Arc`

👀 Views: 247 đŸ’Ŧ Answers: 1 📅 Created: 2025-06-08
rust tokio concurrency arc lifetime Rust

I'm wondering if anyone has experience with I'm stuck on something that should probably be simple. I've looked through the documentation and I'm still confused about I am trying to build a simple concurrent application in Rust using the `tokio` library, where I want to share some state between multiple tasks... However, I keep running into lifetime issues that I need to seem to resolve. I'm using `Arc` to share a `HashMap<String, i32>` among the tasks. My current code looks like this: ```rust use std::collections::HashMap; use std::sync::{Arc, Mutex}; use tokio::task; #[tokio::main] async fn main() { let shared_data = Arc::new(Mutex::new(HashMap::new())); for i in 0..5 { let data_clone = Arc::clone(&shared_data); task::spawn(async move { let mut data = data_clone.lock().unwrap(); data.insert(format!("key_{}", i), i); }); } } ``` However, when I run this, I get the following behavior: ``` behavior[E0507]: want to move out of `data_clone` because it is borrowed --> src/main.rs:12:41 | 12 | let mut data = data_clone.lock().unwrap(); | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ move occurs because `data_clone` has type `Arc<Mutex<HashMap<String, i32>>>`, which does not implement the `Copy` trait ``` I believe the question lies in how I am handling the `Arc` and the borrow checker. I've tried to adjust the scope of the variables and even used a different method to lock the mutex, but none of these approaches seem to resolve the scenario. What am I missing here? Is there a best practice for sharing mutable state among tasks in `tokio`? Any help would be greatly appreciated! For context: I'm using Rust on Windows. What am I doing wrong? I'm working on a web app that needs to handle this. Is there a better approach? The project is a microservice built with Rust. I'm coming from a different tech stack and learning Rust. Has anyone else encountered this?