I think it is still not accepted into Boost, but a good staring point: threadpool. Some example of usage, from the web site: #include “threadpool.hpp” using namespace boost::threadpool; // Some example tasks void first_task() { … } void second_task() { … } void third_task() { … } void execute_with_threadpool() { // Create a thread pool. … Read more
Actually I use the following to replace WaitHandle.WaitAll(doneEvents); foreach (var e in doneEvents) e.WaitOne();
There’re related questions on stackoverflow: ForkJoinPool stalls during invokeAll/join ForkJoinPool seems to waste a thread I made a runnable stripped down version of what is happening (jvm arguments i used: -Xms256m -Xmx1024m -Xss8m): import java.util.ArrayList; import java.util.List; import java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool; import java.util.concurrent.RecursiveAction; import java.util.concurrent.RecursiveTask; import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit; public class Test1 { private static ForkJoinPool pool = new … Read more
So i instead decided to write tests for this and see it on practical data. Test Legend Itr: Iteration Seq: Sequential Approach. PrlEx: Parallel Extensions – Parallel.ForEach TPL: Task Parallel Library TPool: ThreadPool Test Results Single-Core CPU [Win7-32] — runs under VMWare — Test Environment: 1 physical cpus, 1 cores, 1 logical cpus. Will be … Read more
Yes, LongRunning forces the creation of a new thread outside the pool. Here’s some pseudo-disassembled code from the latest framework version: … if (task.Options HasFlag LongRunning) then create new Thread thread thread.Start(task) … Edit: converted from ugly C# to pseudocode.
If there is no need to create new Thread in ThreadPool scenario, then how it works with same thread which just finished its run method, will that Thread can be used again? Simple – the original thread never actually completes. It just waits for another task to execute. In pseudo-code: // No, this isn’t even … Read more
The multiprocessing.pool.ThreadPool behaves the same as the multiprocessing.Pool with the only difference that uses threads instead of processes to run the workers logic. The reason you see hi outside of main() being printed multiple times with the multiprocessing.Pool is due to the fact that the pool will spawn 5 independent processes. Each process will initialize … Read more
Yes. This is a common way to design multithreaded servers and accepted design practice. You can also fork several times and have the child processes call accept, this will allow you to do multithreading without needing a threads library. Older servers do this.
I have done this same thing. The trick is to create a BlockingQueue where the offer() method is really a put(). (you can use whatever base BlockingQueue impl you want). public class LimitedQueue<E> extends LinkedBlockingQueue<E> { public LimitedQueue(int maxSize) { super(maxSize); } @Override public boolean offer(E e) { // turn offer() and add() into a … Read more
This answer is from monkjack, a comment from the accepted answer. However, one can miss this great answer so I’m reposting it here. implicit val ec = ExecutionContext.fromExecutor(Executors.newFixedThreadPool(10)) If you just need to change the thread pool count, just use the global executor and pass the following system properties. -Dscala.concurrent.context.numThreads=8 -Dscala.concurrent.context.maxThreads=8