Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: thread pool with CachedThreadPool
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:43:57 +0200
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <br6n5eF4pmgU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <liirm6$1vl6$1@ariadne.rz.tu-clausthal.de> <12vmb157ulwwb.1cmusyz7wuuyi$.dlg@40tude.net> <lij2aj$217t$1@ariadne.rz.tu-clausthal.de> <H2i3v.81309$aK5.58575@fx24.iad>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 4jVTZDR46dywZrQ5QXbF5A/CD/ENd9/DWcLmO8gtg/Ir/07yg=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:I2PfF3j05qZkhz7KU196Xy9OZSA=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
In-Reply-To: <H2i3v.81309$aK5.58575@fx24.iad>
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:28098

On 16.04.2014 00:05, Daniel Pitts wrote:

> "Threads" with nothing to do take up very little CPU.  They may take up
> memory or other resources, but they can be made to do nothing until
> called for.

What do they take CPU for other than that negligible amount of time the 
kernel takes for administering them?  I'd say for all practical purposes 
you can assume a blocked thread to take up zero %CPU.  Or am I missing 
something?

Cheers

	robert