[concurrency-interest] Why does new ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor(0) not throw an exception?

Bill Pugh pugh at cs.umd.edu
Sat Dec 6 12:45:20 EST 2008

On Dec 5, 2008, at 6:37 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:

> Hmmmm... I don't remember the details of this change.
> corepoolsize of 0 makes sense for ThreadPoolExecutor.
> The STPE spec does use the word "almost"
> to warn about this possibility.
> It might provide a way to make a pool quiescent.
> Set corepoolsize to zero during certain times of the day?
> Probably there are better ways to do that.

Yeah, sorry, it slipped that you could later call setCorePoolSize.  
setMaximumPoolSize doesn't work, but calling setCorePoolSize does.


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list