: Re: Project Loom VirtualThreads hang

[Ron Pressler]

I don’t think that increasing the scheduler’s parallelism would help, nor do I think you’d see a “stop-the-world”, but again, these hypotheses are just not actionable. There’s nothing we can do to address them. When you find a problem, please report it and we’ll investigate what can be done.

— Ron

On 6 Jan 2023, at 19:11, Arnaud Masson <arnaud.masson at fr.ibm.com<mailto:arnaud.masson at fr.ibm.com>> wrote:

I don’t think having 100% CPU usage on a pod is enough to justify a “stop-the-world” effect on Loom scheduling for the other tasks.
Also 100% is the extreme case, but there can be 75% CPU usage, meaning only 1 carrier left for all other tasks in my example.

Again not a blocker I guess, just have to increase the carrier count to mitigate, but it’s good old native thread sizing again where it should not be really needed.

“Time-sharing would make those expensive tasks complete in a lot more than 10 seconds”:
I understand there would be switching overhead (so it’s slower), but I don’t understand why it would be much slower if there are few of them like in my example.

thanks
Arnaud



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/attachments/20230106/db558d55/attachment.htm>