[concurrency-interest] ForkJoinPool.managedBlock() not spawning new thread

√iktor Ҡlang viktor.klang at gmail.com
Fri Jul 20 15:00:46 EDT 2012

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Alex Lam S.L. <alexlamsl at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Doug Lea <dl at cs.oswego.edu> wrote:
> > Yes. We cannot do anything like this in general, because
> > the steals here might violate task dependencies -- joining
> > the stolen task could block waiting for the current action
> > to finish, which it never will. But so long
> > as you know that this is not possible, it can work well.
> Update: after some wall clock measurements, the naive version (which
> only uses ~88% CPU) is not statistically slower (i.e. sometimes
> faster) than the Task.steal() version.
> So though I feel a bit surprised by it, I think I will live with the
> simpler code and have some spare CPU cycles for typing emails :-)

Wisdom of the day: Busy != Producing value

> Alex.
> _______________________________________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest

Viktor Klang

Akka Tech Lead
Typesafe <http://www.typesafe.com/> - The software stack for applications
that scale

Twitter: @viktorklang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20120720/d6d59d36/attachment.html>

More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list