[undertow-dev] Is a large number of IO threads acceptable?

[Chandru]

My line of thought was, if every request requires a blocking DB call, why
incur the cost of switching threads within a request, if I can instead
simply increase the number of IO threads without any adverse effect.

--
Chandra Sekar.S

On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Bill O'Neil <bill at dartalley.com> wrote:

> This is exactly what the worker thread pool is built for why would you
> want to use the IO threads instead? The IO threads are for reading /
> writing to the socket of the HTTP request. All blocking operations SHOULD
> be dispatched to worker threads.
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Chandru <chandru.in at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If I have a HTTP service where every request requires a blocking JDBC
>> call, is it acceptable to increase the number of IO threads to a large
>> value (say, 10*cores) instead of dispatching to worker thread pool on each
>> request?
>>
>> Will configuring such a large number of IO threads lead to any adverse
>> effect on throughput or latency?
>>
>> --
>> Chandra Sekar.S
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> undertow-dev mailing list
>> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20160708/2ecfe48b/attachment.html