前一久看到一篇文章美团高性能队列——Disruptor，时候自己琢磨了一下；经过反复修改，实现了一个相似的无锁队列EsQueue，该无锁队列相对Disruptor，而言少了队列数量属性quantity的CAP操作，因此性能杠杠的，在测试环境：windows10，Core(TM) i5-3320M CPU 2.6G, 8G 内存，go1.8.3，下性能达到1460-1600万之间。现在把代码发布出来，请同行验证一下，代码如下：
注：请注意本方法已经通过 go test -race, 无警告。
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 1, Times: 10000000, miss: 0, use: 573.9109ms, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 2, Times: 20000000, miss: 0, use: 1.1548186s, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 3, Times: 30000000, miss: 0, use: 1.6787567s, 55ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 4, Times: 40000000, miss: 0, use: 2.2651588s, 56ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 5, Times: 50000000, miss: 0, use: 2.8762257s, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 6, Times: 60000000, miss: 0, use: 3.4914045s, 58ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 7, Times: 70000000, miss: 0, use: 4.0040473s, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 8, Times: 80000000, miss: 0, use: 4.5712089s, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 9, Times: 90000000, miss: 0, use: 5.1765s, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 10, Times: 10000000, miss: 0, use: 586.914ms, 58ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 11, Times: 11000000, miss: 0, use: 644.4879ms, 58ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 12, Times: 12000000, miss: 0, use: 694.4974ms, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 13, Times: 13000000, miss: 0, use: 745.5212ms, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 14, Times: 14000000, miss: 0, use: 822.6344ms, 58ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 15, Times: 15000000, miss: 0, use: 868.4927ms, 57ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 16, Times: 16000000, miss: 0, use: 943.6699ms, 58ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: Sum, Times: 541000000, miss: 0, use: 31.0982489s, 57ns/op注: 受Meltdown和Spectre处理器漏洞修复的影响，性能下降50%
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 1, Times: 1000000, miss: 0, use: 90.8111ms, 90ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 2, Times: 2000000, miss: 0, use: 267.0498ms, 133ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 3, Times: 3000000, miss: 0, use: 325.0141ms, 108ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 4, Times: 4000000, miss: 0, use: 459.9871ms, 114ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 5, Times: 5000000, miss: 0, use: 531.0004ms, 106ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 6, Times: 6000000, miss: 0, use: 675.946ms, 112ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 7, Times: 7000000, miss: 0, use: 742.9081ms, 106ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 8, Times: 8000000, miss: 0, use: 900.09ms, 112ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 9, Times: 9000000, miss: 0, use: 966.0397ms, 107ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 10, Times: 1000000, miss: 0, use: 121.9575ms, 121ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 11, Times: 1100000, miss: 0, use: 123.9134ms, 112ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 12, Times: 1200000, miss: 0, use: 145.0397ms, 120ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 13, Times: 1300000, miss: 0, use: 144.9599ms, 111ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 14, Times: 1400000, miss: 0, use: 167.2686ms, 119ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 15, Times: 1500000, miss: 0, use: 168.7482ms, 112ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 16, Times: 1600000, miss: 0, use: 190.9838ms, 119ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 17, Times: 1700000, miss: 0, use: 186.9993ms, 109ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 18, Times: 1800000, miss: 0, use: 215.0006ms, 119ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 19, Times: 1900000, miss: 0, use: 211.9994ms, 111ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 20, Times: 2000000, miss: 0, use: 239.0021ms, 119ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 21, Times: 2100000, miss: 0, use: 233.9982ms, 111ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 22, Times: 2200000, miss: 0, use: 262.0004ms, 119ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 23, Times: 2300000, miss: 0, use: 245.9992ms, 106ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 24, Times: 2400000, miss: 0, use: 284.9998ms, 118ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 25, Times: 2500000, miss: 0, use: 279.0001ms, 111ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 26, Times: 2600000, miss: 0, use: 308.0004ms, 118ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 27, Times: 2700000, miss: 0, use: 300.0002ms, 111ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 28, Times: 2800000, miss: 0, use: 332.0004ms, 118ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 29, Times: 2900000, miss: 0, use: 323.0204ms, 111ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 30, Times: 3000000, miss: 0, use: 356.9781ms, 118ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 31, Times: 3100000, miss: 0, use: 346.001ms, 111ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: 32, Times: 3200000, miss: 0, use: 377.9711ms, 118ns/op
go1.8.3 amd64, Grp: Sum, Times: 93300000, miss: 0, use: 10.5246881s, 112ns/op