From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6f24e26ea2e03c4
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!b30g2000yqd.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Threadpool with priority version 1.1 ...
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:30:23 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <7b059d0f-791b-4ac9-bf64-c50448ec99f7@b30g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
References: <21e6697e-fd7c-4c5e-93dc-8d894449b5e6@f8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<ff3671a8-cf19-4cee-8b71-305bb6b1e9c1@l25g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
	<4ba9e189$0$6886$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <1id5xnuz0x892$.1odbic5ppiv07.dlg@40tude.net>
	<4baa27f2$0$6770$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <Xns9D4580FB5667EWarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.245>
	<7794a413-34e9-4340-abcc-a6568246fc38@h18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
	<Xns9D4689576CA93WarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.213>
 <1rn39ttn5pon9$.11n683q5t6itu.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.138.182.236
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1269595823 2654 127.0.0.1 (26 Mar 2010 09:30:23
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:30:23 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: b30g2000yqd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.138.182.236;
	posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100115 Firefox/3.6,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:10749
Date: 2010-03-26T02:30:23-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 26 Mar, 09:19, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
wrote:

> BTW, if this approach worked for an application, it should also do for the
> OS,

It is true, obtaining resources up-front requires more careful
analysis of the problem that is being solve and is not always
possible.
The difference between application and OS is in the amount of
knowledge about what the software will do and applications tend to
know more than OS in this aspect.
That is why it is more realistic to have applications allocating their
resources during initialization phase than to see that at the OS
level.

I'm not a big fan of programs that allocate and deallocate the same
resource repeatedly - this is an obvious candidate for caching and
object reuse, where the cost of allocation is amortized. Fortunately,
it is not even necessary for a user code to do that - think about a
caching memory allocator, there are analogies. And the language
standard does not prevent implementations from reusing physical
threads, if they are used as implementation foundations for tasks.

--
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com

YAMI4 - Messaging Solution for Distributed Systems
http://www.inspirel.com/yami4