threadpool

what is difference between the below ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem vs Task.Factory.StartNew If the above code is called 500 times for some long running task does it mean all the thread pool threads will be taken up? Or will TPL (2nd option) be smart enough to just take up threads less or equal to number of processors? If you're going to start a long-running task with TPL, you should specify TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning , which will mean it doesn't schedule it on the thread-pool. (EDIT: As noted in comments, this is a scheduler-specific decision, and isn't a hard and fast guarantee, but I'd

I am trying to create a limited thread pool class using boost::asio. But I am stuck at one point can some one help me. The only problem is the place where I should decrease counter? code does not work as expected. the problem is I don't know when my thread will finish execution and how I will come to know that it has return to pool #include <boost/asio.hpp> #include <iostream> #include <boost/thread/thread.hpp> #include <boost/bind.hpp> #include <boost/thread/mutex.hpp> #include <stack> using namespace std; using namespace boost; class ThreadPool { static int count; int NoOfThread; thread

I have a program that spawns threads (~5-150) which perform a bunch of tasks. Originally, I used a FixedThreadPool because this similar question suggested they were better suited for longer lived tasks and with my very limited knowledge of multithreading, I considered the average life of the threads (several minutes) " long lived ". However, I recently added the capability to spawn additional threads and doing so takes me above the thread limit I set. In this case, would it be better to guess and increase the number threads I can allow or to switch to a CachedThreadPool so I have no wasted

In a Spring web application I have several DAO and service layer beans. One service layer bean has annotated @Async / @Scheduled methods. These methods depend on other (autowired) beans. I have configured two thread pools in XML: <bean id="taskExecutor" class="org.springframework.scheduling.concurrent.ThreadPoolTaskExecutor"> <property name="corePoolSize" value="2" /> <property name="maxPoolSize" value="5" /> <property name="queueCapacity" value="5" /> <property name="waitForTasksToCompleteOnShutdown" value="true" /> <property name="rejectedExecutionHandler"> <bean class="java.util.concurrent

Can someone please explain what is thread per request and thread per connection? Which model do servlets work on? How threads are allocated to handle HTTP requests? Is it thread/request or connection? And let's say if I want to perform a time consuming task in my Servlet 's doGet() method asynchronously, I start a new thread using Java executors so that lengthy calculations are done in a separate thread and response is sent right away. Now does that ensure that I have freed the thread which had been processing my HttpServletRequest or is it still being used because a child thread is still

In the code below, due to the interface, the class LazyBar must return a task from it's method (and for arguments sake can't be changed). If LazyBar s implementation is unusual in that it happens to run quickly and synchronously - what is the best way to return a No-Operation task from the method? I have gone with Task.Delay(0) below, however I would like to know if this has any performance side-effects if the function is called a lot (for arguments sake, say hundreds of times a second): Does this syntactic sugar un-wind to something big? Does it start clogging up my application's thread pool?