The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: "Dan Shappir" <shap...@math.tau.ac.il>
Date: 1996/11/04
Subject: Re: Maximum Threads
Mark Wickman <wst...@light.iinet.net.au> wrote in article > Does anyone know of a rule of thumb etc. for what is considered too I'm also unaware of any documented restrictions on the number of > many threads to execute at once ? > I know it is based on many different factors, but in theory my > Does anyone have any ideas ? threads, but if your application can spawn 1000's you should rethink your design. There are several reasons for this: 1. Threads require and acquire system resources (even worker threads). Even if you don't reach the limit you are going to adversely effect system performance. 2. Context switches are expensive, especially on Windows 95. Many threads often mean many context switches. Even if not I suspect that many threads will result in longer context switches. 3. The different Win32 platforms probably have different restrictions on the number of threads. 4. You may cause other threaded applications to fail. If you are only targeting the new NT you may want to look into fibers but I think the best solution is to maintain state in C++ objects instead of on a thread's stack. Dan You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||