Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- java:threadpoolexecutor [2025/02/22 18:35] – carl
+++ java:threadpoolexecutor [2025/02/22 18:40] (current) – [ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor] carl
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 A consequence of not being able to bound the queue is that the thread count is more important:
-* You cannot have a cached ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.  ThreadPoolExecutor will not create a thread if submission to the task queue succeeds.  Since submission always succeeds, no threads will be created.
+  * You cannot have a cached ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.  ThreadPoolExecutor will not create a thread if submission to the task queue succeeds.  Since submission always succeeds, no threads will be created.
-* As mentioned in the javadocs, a core pool size of 0 is practically useless, since no threads will be alive to process the task.
+  * As mentioned in the javadocs, a core pool size of 0 is practically useless, since no threads will be alive to process the task.
-* If all the threads in the ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor are busy (e.g. blocking), no new tasks can be executed.  This is important for periodically running tasks, such as those submitted with `scheduleAtFixedRate` and `scheduleWithFixedDelay()`.  These tasks will not be run in a timely manner.
+  * If all the threads in the ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor are busy (e.g. blocking), no new tasks can be executed.  This is important for periodically running tasks, such as those submitted with ''scheduleAtFixedRate()'' and ''scheduleWithFixedDelay()''.  These tasks will not be run in a timely manner.