This has been posted to the concurrency-interest mailing list.<http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/2012-January/008987.html> Apparently there have been some nice improvements to ForkJoin:
...This also greatly improves throughput when all tasks are async and submitted to the pool rather than forked, which becomes a reasonable way to structure actor frameworks, as well as many plain services that you might otherwise use ThreadPoolExecutor for. These improvements also lead to a less hostile stance about about submitting possibly-blocking tasks. These improvements are available now in the jsr166 package <http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/dl/concurrency-interest/index.html>. Should agents now use a ForkJoinPool? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
