Dave <no****************@wi.rr.com> wrote:
What would a second threadpool do that the first would not?
It would block different threads. You could have two pools, one with
long-running tasks and one with short-running tasks. If you only add
the right type of task to each pool, you don't get long-running tasks
blocking short-running tasks, which is what you get with a single pool.
You often only want short-running tasks blocking each other and long-
running tasks blocking each other - that way you end up with a much
shorter latency for short-running tasks than long-running tasks.
I agree with the OP - the current ThreadPool is unfortunately limiting
:(
--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too