[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13256626#comment-13256626
]
Flavio Junqueira commented on BOOKKEEPER-173:
---------------------------------------------
I have one quick clarification and one request. If setNumWorkerThreads is
called after the BookKeeper object is constructed, then it has no effect on the
number of threads in the pool. Should we enforce somehow that the value doesn't
change after the BookKeeper object is constructed? Otherwise the semantics
could be confusing.
Also, it would be good to add a description of these options to the
documentation.
> Uncontrolled number of threads in bookkeeper
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BOOKKEEPER-173
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-173
> Project: Bookkeeper
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Philipp Sushkin
> Fix For: 4.1.0
>
> Attachments: BK-173.patch
>
>
> I am not sure if it is a but or not.
> Say, I do have pc with 256 cores, and there is following code in bookkeeper:
> {code:title=BookKeeper.java|borderStyle=solid}
> OrderedSafeExecutor callbackWorker = new
> OrderedSafeExecutor(Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors());
> OrderedSafeExecutor mainWorkerPool = new OrderedSafeExecutor(Runtime
> .getRuntime().availableProcessors());
> {code}
> As I understand, callbackWorker is not used at all, so it could be removed.
> Also could be required to get more control over mainWorkerPool (say, extract
> interface + pass instance through contructor).
> Myabe there are other places in library where some thread pools are created
> without ability to reuse existing thread pools in application.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
