Eric Woodruff said: > Yeah, it's the same concept. I had failed to distinguish thread_pool > versus thread_group. > > Hopefully, adding the timeout and growing logic does not sacrifice the > efficiency of the pool when it is full/has plenty to work on.
Shouldn't be a large issue. If the pool is full (i.e. max_threads has been created and all are busy) the queue can still be added to, so there's no effect to the performance of add. The check for being full is a simple integer comparison, so shouldn't effect the performance. The check for decaying a thread uses conditions and timeouts, so also should not effect the efficiency. The only thing that can effect efficiency is the actual act of creating a thread when the pool grows, but careful specification of min/max/timeout can optimize this. If you have to, you can specify min/max to be the same, thus fixing the size of the pool and ensuring you never incur the overhead of growing the pool. However, this will often be at a sacrifice to resource utilization, so individual needs will have to dictate how one defines these parameters. -- William E. Kempf _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
