NIO.2 and GC activity

[Alan Bateman]

Leon Finker wrote:
> :
> Just one final note, even if reads were not queued to completion port for
> non pooled thread and different groups didn't initiate the reads, there
> would still be an ordering issue to deal with. If one called WSARecv() N
> times in succession for the same socket, they are guaranteed to complete in
> the order we submitted them. However, undefined ordering is introduced when
> completion notifications are actually done (due to regular thread
> scheduling) because N number of threads are servicing the completion port.
> So, one would have to deal with out of order issues anyway. Thanks for your
> answers!
>   
Right, if this were allowed, it turns into a resequencing problem for 
the application to deal with. In this API the attachment object could be 
used for such purposes.

-Alan.