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: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feedme.ziplink.net!news.swapon.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Threadpool with priority version 1.1 ...
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 17:30:05 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <Xns9D4689576CA93WarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.213>
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>
Injection-Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 17:30:05 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: feeder.eternal-september.org;
	logging-data="23063"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+45gowesr0ihX3exMuXEMWK5STPza0caY="
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
X-Face: 
 &6@]C2>ZS=NM|HE-^zWuryN#Z/2_.s9E|G&~DRi|sav9{E}XQJb*\_>=a5"q]\%A;5}LKP][1mA{gZ,Q!j
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wJtq8z9uJtrVP2xpTuSvGo5hTbQ=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9771
Date: 2010-03-25T17:30:05+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Maciej Sobczak expounded in news:7794a413-34e9-4340-abcc-a6568246fc38
@h18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com:

> On 24 Mar, 17:40, Warren <ve3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Another barrier I see to this is the high cost of
>> starting a new thread and stack space allocation.
> 
>> Somehow you gotta make thread startup and shutdown
>> cheaper.
> 
> Why?
> 
> The problem of startup/shutdown cost and how many cores you have are
> completely orthogonal.
> I see no problem in starting N threads at the initialization time, use
> them throughout the application lifetime and then shut down at the end
> (or never)...

I forgot to mention that the disadvantage of this approach is that
you have to "pre-allocate" stack space for each thread (whether
by default amount or by a specific designed amount).

If you used a true cactus stack, this is not an issue. But with a 
traditional thread, you could choose stack requirements at the 
point of thread creation. Not so, if you create them all up front.

So there are downsides to this approach.

Warren