Re: thread vs fork?
Roedy Green wrote:
Peter Cheung wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said:
hi, is fork runs faster then thread in java?
There is obviously less overhead with a new thread than forking off a
new process. A thread shares the same pool of objects. A fork has
What does that have to do with Java?
In Java the exact opposite is true:
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ForkJoinTask.=
html
"
Abstract base class for tasks that run within a ForkJoinPool. A ForkJoinTas=
k is a thread-like entity that is much lighter weight than a normal thread.=
Huge numbers of tasks and subtasks may be hosted by a small number of actu=
al threads in a ForkJoinPool, at the price of some usage limitations."
its own JVM and pool of objects. Forking is usually to code you had
nothing to do with writing or that is written in other languages.
Unless, of course, you are talking about forking in the Java sense.
Threads are when the piece of work to do is quite small
No, that's not true at all.
Threads are just fine when the piece of work is large, and in many cases
are motivated by the need to do large pieces of work. The whole idea of
'SwingWorker', for example, is to perform large units of work in a differen=
t
thread from the GUI.
or needs access to your object pool.
That is true, assuming you need concurrency.
Well, partially true. In many cases there are non-thread solutions.
--
Lew