I\'m sure I could hack something together which would enable me to figure this开发者_JAVA技巧 out, but I\'m hoping there\'s an out-of-the-box solution I\'m just missing. I read the docs but I didn\'t
I am using the Executor framework specifically Executors.newCachedThreadPool(); I have a list of Runnables e.g. 100.
I wrote some Java code to learn more about the Executor framework. Specifically, I wrote code to verify the Collatz Hypothesis - this says that if you iteratively apply the following function to any
I am stuck with this following problem. Say, I have a request which has 1000 items, and I would like to utilize Java Executor to resolve this.
I am using an Executor [fixed thread pool] with my own ThreadFactory that adds a Looper: Handler HANDLER = new Handler();
In a life without Java Executors, new threads would have to be created for each Runnable tasks. Making new threads requires thread overhead (creation and teardown) that adds complexity and wasted time
I\'m trying to use a ThreadPoolExecutor to schedule tasks, but running into some problems with its policies. Here\'s its stated behavior:
I have an object that needs to do periodically do some work while the object itself is alive, so I designed something like the following. Basically a Main class which contains a reference to a Schedul
Is there a possibility to set priority to tasks which are executed by E开发者_开发知识库xecutors? I\'ve found some statements in JCIP about it\'s possible but I cannot find any example and I cannot fi
I have two threads, and I want to make sure I am doing the synchronization correctly on the LinkedBlockingQueue..Is this correct?Or is the explicit synchronization on (messageToCommsQueue) not necessa
加载中,请稍侯......