[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.

Bill



More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list