MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - (Page 55) class application that is trying to process numerous client requests, the thread pool enables the preferred server concurrency model for the Windows platform, which is to process as many requests concurrently as there are processors in the system. One alternative model I’ve seen developers try is to dedicate one thread for each client being serviced, but this model does not scale well with a large number of clients. Not only do the large number of threads consume significant resources, but the cost of context switching between them becomes significant and impacts the overall quality of service each client receives. The new thread pool component addresses a number of limitations of the legacy thread pool. For example, the new thread pool lets you create multiple thread pools per process, while the old model allowed only one. This lets you isolate the tasks the application performs by some chosen criteria. For example, suppose you’re writing a distributed server application that is going to use the thread pool to process asynchronous I/O completions on network connections. The network connections are of two types, one from a client application and the second from other instances of the server application running on different computers. Let’s further assume that you have to support a large number of simultaneous client connections per server and that the number of client requests is much greater than server-to-server connections, but the server-to-server connections have a higher priority. When both client and server network connections are processed on a single thread pool, there is a single queue to which all the completion notifications are queued. This means that an I/O completion from a server connection will not be processed until all I/O completions in front of it in the queue are processed, including those from any clients. This can result in significant delays in processing server connections when the system is under heavy client load. Dedicating a thread pool to client connections and another to server connections allows for isolation because each thread pool has its own queue and set of worker threads. The scheduler in the operating system will ensure that the processors are shared fairly between the threads in both pools. However, it’s important to use multiple thread pools judiciously as creating too many per process can hurt performance and reduce throughput. The legacy thread pool used two types of worker threads: I/O and non-I/O, which at times caused confusion. If the developer didn’t understand the distinction, the result could be limited performance or incorrect behavior. Moreover, having two distinct thread groupings meant that the thread pool implementation itself was less efficient since it couldn’t share threads between callback functions of different types. In the new thread pool, this distinction is removed and all worker threads are the same. In the legacy API, QueueUserWorkItem was used to queue a function to be called asynchronously on a thread pool worker thread. The legacy API provided no way for the application to determine when the worker thread had finished executing the callback function. If the callback function was located in a DLL, it was virtually impossible to guarantee that it was safe to unload the DLL. This meant that unloading a DLL occasionally caused the hosting process to crash. There was also no way to cancel callbacks that Figure 1 Thread Pool Object Types Object Type TP_POOL TP_TIMER TP_WAIT TP_WORK TP_IO TP_CLEANUP_GROUP TP_CALLBACK_ENVIRON Description Pool of threads used to execute callbacks. Invoke a callback function at a due time. Invoke a callback function when a kernel object is signaled or the wait times out. Invoke a callback function asynchronously. Invoke a callback function when an asynchronous I/O completes. Track one or more thread pool callback objects. Bind a thread pool to its callback objects, and optionally a cleanup group. were in the thread pool’s queue awaiting execution, so there was no choice but to wait for all requests to drain, which could introduce significant delays. Finally, the legacy API does not separate resource allocation from resource use. Since these resource allocations can and do fail, the legacy API makes it hard to develop systems that have reliability guarantees. The new thread pool API makes the separation between resource allocation and usage distinct, so that once a resource has been successfully allocated, there is virtually no posAll the objects created sibility of failure for wellby the thread pool, and all written code when those the worker threads resources are put to use. The new thread pool managed by it, become API is object-based, where part of the application each type of object has a set process using them. of functions for creation, cleanup, and modifying properties. Figure 1 summarizes the object types exposed by the API. It’s important to understand that all the objects created by the thread pool, and all the worker threads managed by it, become part of the application process using them. Thread Pool Objects The first step in preparing a thread pool for use is to create one using the CreateThreadpool function, which is shown in Figure 2. The function takes a reserved parameter that must be NULL. If the function succeeds, it returns a PTP_POOL representing the newly Figure 2 Thread Pool Object API PTP_POOL WINAPI CreateThreadpool(PVOID reserved); BOOL WINAPI SetThreadpoolThreadMinimum(PTP_POOL ptpp, DWORD cthrdMin); VOID WINAPI SetThreadpoolThreadMaximum(PTP_POOL ptpp, DWORD cthrdMost); VOID WINAPI CloseThreadpool(PTP_POOL ptpp); october2007 55
Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of MSDN Magazine - October 2007 Cover Contents Toolbox CLR Inside Out Basic Instincts Data Points Cutting Edge Pooled Threads WPF Threads Parallel Linq Parallel Performance Mobile Apps Test Run Foundations Windows with C++ Netting C++ .NET Matters { End Bracket } Net Nuptials MSDN Magazine - October 2007 MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page Cover1) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page Cover2) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 1) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 2) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 3) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 4) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 5) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 6) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 7) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 8) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 9) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Contents (Page 10) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Toolbox (Page 11) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Toolbox (Page 12) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Toolbox (Page 13) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Toolbox (Page 14) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Toolbox (Page 15) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Toolbox (Page 16) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 17) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 18) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 19) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 20) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 21) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 22) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 23) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 24) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 25) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 26) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 27) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 28) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 29) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - CLR Inside Out (Page 30) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Basic Instincts (Page 31) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Basic Instincts (Page 32) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Basic Instincts (Page 33) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Basic Instincts (Page 34) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Basic Instincts (Page 35) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Basic Instincts (Page 36) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Data Points (Page 37) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Data Points (Page 38) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Data Points (Page 39) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Data Points (Page 40) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Data Points (Page 41) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Data Points (Page 42) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 43) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 44) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 45) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 46) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 47) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 48) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 49) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 50) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 51) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 52) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Cutting Edge (Page 53) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 54) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 55) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 56) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 57) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 58) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 59) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 60) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 61) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 62) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 63) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 64) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Pooled Threads (Page 65) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - WPF Threads (Page 66) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - WPF Threads (Page 67) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - WPF Threads (Page 68) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - WPF Threads (Page 69) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 70) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 71) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 72) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 73) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 74) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 75) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 76) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 77) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Linq (Page 78) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 79) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 80) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 81) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 82) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 83) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 84) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 85) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 86) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 87) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 88) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 89) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Parallel Performance (Page 90) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 91) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 92) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 93) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 94) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 95) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 96) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 97) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 98) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 99) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Mobile Apps (Page 100) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 101) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 102) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 103) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 104) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 105) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 106) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 107) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 108) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 109) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 110) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 111) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 112) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 113) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Test Run (Page 114) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 115) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 116) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 117) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 118) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 119) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 120) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 121) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 122) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 123) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Foundations (Page 124) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Windows with C++ (Page 125) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Windows with C++ (Page 126) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Windows with C++ (Page 127) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Windows with C++ (Page 128) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Windows with C++ (Page 129) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Windows with C++ (Page 130) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Windows with C++ (Page 131) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Windows with C++ (Page 132) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Netting C++ (Page 133) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Netting C++ (Page 134) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Netting C++ (Page 135) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Netting C++ (Page 136) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - .NET Matters (Page 137) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - .NET Matters (Page 138) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - .NET Matters (Page 139) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - .NET Matters (Page 140) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - .NET Matters (Page 141) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - .NET Matters (Page 142) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - .NET Matters (Page 143) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Net Nuptials (Page 144) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Net Nuptials (Page Cover3) MSDN Magazine - October 2007 - Net Nuptials (Page Cover4)
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.