A question on parallel

[David Holmes]

On 27/08/2013 1:51 AM, Jose wrote:
>
> Fair enough,
>
> if the EDT is going to be blocked anyway until the operation completes, it
> makes sense to use it in the meantime as a working thread.

Ummm you _don't_ want the EDT to block! Anyone who thinks they need to 
launch a parallel operation from an event handler needs to fork it off 
to another thread, just like any long-running or potentially blocking 
operation.

David

> Thanks for the info
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Brian Goetz [mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com]
> Enviado el: lunes, 26 de agosto de 2013 17:36
> Para: Jose
> CC: lambda-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Asunto: Re: A question on parallel
>
> The streams framework has no awareness of "special" threads like EDT.
> EDT is the initiating thread, no different from any other thread.
>
> When you initiate a terminal stream operation (sequential or parallel), the
> initiating thread is blocked until the operation completes.  If the
> computation is parallel, the initiating thread may get coopted into being a
> worker thread.
>
> So:
>    - No special behavior for EDT
>    - The seq/par distinction is indistinguishable from the EDT's perspective,
> since both block until the operation is done.
>
> Even if the initiating thread didn't temporarily join the worker pool, the
> EDT would still be blocked.
>
> On 8/26/2013 11:20 AM, Jose wrote:
>>
>>
>> When running a parallel pipeline form the EDT, which policy
>> determimine which tasks will run on the EDT?
>>
>> There is a way to make all the resulting tasks to run in working threads?
>>
>>
>
>