Am Sunday 08 March 2009 15:29:05 schrieb Edouard A.:
Unfortunately, I am unable to compile the tp library. TT
Hmm - did you try version 23? I've no problems to compile default_pool( gcc-4.3). [Edouard A.]
Yes, this is version 23, I am using Visual Studio 2008.
pool accepts multiple integer arguments (poolsize, high_watermark low_watermark,...) - with specific types for each argument the meaning of each arg becomes clear (see scott meyers advise). [Edouard A.]
When I initialize a std::vector, I'm happy to be able to write std::vector<> v(10) and not std::vector<> v(vector_size(10)). Sometimes parameter's purpose is obvious. Your call.
When scheduling several tasks with submit, I find it odd that I don't have a pool.wait()
pool::shutdown() or pool::shutdown_now() -> diff. explained in the docs
[Edouard A.] I'm afraid that the method name might be a bit misleading, I would expect a shutdown() method to kill my pool and make it unusable for later use without going calling startup() function.
a task is finsihed if its result (shared_future) becomes ready -> shared_future< R >task< R >::result() void shared_future< R >::wait() [Edouard A.]
I guess your internal scheduler knows when all tasks are processed, why not offering a condition variable... Otherwise it means I have to scan all the tasks to know if they are all finished. But you pointed out shutdown() and I think it will do the trick.
Some tests done with parallel "filling" on a concurrent_vector show that tbb does better but threadpool is not humiliated: this is clear because threadpool use a single-lock global qeue. I'm working on a lock-free global queue - I hope theadpool becomes faster. [Edouard A.]
For long queues, most likely.
the default pool should already be avaliable - I don't understand why you initialize it with poolsize.
The shutdown() method's purpose was unclear to me before your explanation, making it easier to create a pool and let the default destructor wait for all threads. -- EA