Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

untimed invokeAny and invokeAll with virtual threads #29787

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: integration
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

njr-11
Copy link
Contributor

@njr-11 njr-11 commented Oct 4, 2024

Untimed invokeAny and invokeAll with virtual=true.
Comments in the code indicated a desire to choose the behavior based on whether the submitting thread is virtual or not, which would have been a good idea, but unfortunately would have been a breaking change because users can already request invokeAny and invokeAll from virtual threads due to Liberty already supporting Java 21.
The next best thing we could do was to make the decision based on the virtual=true setting for the managed executor, which is not yet GA function. In cases where both are virtual, this will work great. But it will not optimize the case where a virtual thread invokes invokeAny or invokeAll to run on platform threads because changing the default for that would be a breaking change to existing behavior.

maxPolicy.strict.desc=Maximum concurrency is strictly enforced. \
Tasks that run on the task submitter's thread count towards maximum concurrency. \
This policy does not allow tasks to run on the task submitter's thread when \
already at maximum concurrency.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note to reviewers: maxPolicy.loose.desc and maxPolicy.strict.desc were not changed. I only split the existing text onto multiple lines so that I could read them in a code editor without needing to keep scrolling back and forth. I also split up maxPolicy.desc for the same reason, but added some text to that one, so that is the one to review.

mswatosh
mswatosh previously approved these changes Oct 4, 2024
@njr-11
Copy link
Contributor Author

njr-11 commented Oct 4, 2024

#build

@LibbyBot
Copy link

LibbyBot commented Oct 4, 2024

Your personal pipeline request is at https://libh-proxy1.fyre.ibm.com/cognitive/pipelineAnalysis.html?uuid=ea9a359f-2e75-4998-9250-b8fee6d4415f

Target locations of links might be accessible only to IBM employees.

@LibbyBot
Copy link

LibbyBot commented Oct 4, 2024

Your personal build request is at https://wasrtc.hursley.ibm.com:9443/jazz/resource/itemOid/com.ibm.team.build.BuildResult/_P2cDIIJoEe-TieZHY4j0Qw

Target locations of links might be accessible only to IBM employees.

Copy link
Member

@dmuelle dmuelle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks

@njr-11
Copy link
Contributor Author

njr-11 commented Oct 4, 2024

#build
#libby

@LibbyBot
Copy link

LibbyBot commented Oct 4, 2024

Your personal pipeline request is at https://libh-proxy1.fyre.ibm.com/cognitive/pipelineAnalysis.html?uuid=8ace4b69-eb91-4a70-935b-4e9faed05b42

Target locations of links might be accessible only to IBM employees.

@LibbyBot
Copy link

LibbyBot commented Oct 4, 2024

@LibbyBot
Copy link

LibbyBot commented Oct 4, 2024

Your personal build request is at https://wasrtc.hursley.ibm.com:9443/jazz/resource/itemOid/com.ibm.team.build.BuildResult/_TuOMMYKYEe-TieZHY4j0Qw

Target locations of links might be accessible only to IBM employees.

@LibbyBot
Copy link

LibbyBot commented Oct 4, 2024

Code analysis and actions

DO NOT DELETE THIS COMMENT.
  • 5 product code files were changed.

  • Please describe in a separate comment how you tested your changes.

  • 1 FAT files were changed, added, or removed.

  • Check that the build did not break the affected FAT suite(s).

  • 1 NLS files were changed and need an ID review.

  • @OpenLiberty/message-reviewer Please review.

  • dev/com.ibm.ws.concurrency.policy/resources/OSGI-INF/l10n/metatype.properties

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants