Maximum number of threads..
-
Hi. Is there a way to override/redefine the maximum number of threads that can be created by an individual application running on XP. I do not particulary want to redesign my application around thread pools, I just want to know if the default maximum number: 64 on my system, can be increased. Best regards. James.
-
Hi. Is there a way to override/redefine the maximum number of threads that can be created by an individual application running on XP. I do not particulary want to redesign my application around thread pools, I just want to know if the default maximum number: 64 on my system, can be increased. Best regards. James.
What makes you think 64 is the maximum?
-
What makes you think 64 is the maximum?
Because in WINNT.H MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS is defined as 64. If i create a 65th thread, WaitForMultipleObjects() returns with a -1.
-
Because in WINNT.H MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS is defined as 64. If i create a 65th thread, WaitForMultipleObjects() returns with a -1.
Laing,James wrote: Is there a way to override/redefine the maximum number of threads that can be created by an individual application running on XP A process can easily create more than 64 threads (just look at Task Manager on a busy server). It's true that
MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTSdefines the maximum number of handles in the array passed in toWaitForMultipleObjects, butMAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTSis not related to how many threads a process can create, which was your original question. Laing,James wrote: I do not particulary want to redesign my application around thread pools Are you actually using thread pools? It sounds like you are, since passing thread handles into WaitForMutlipleObjects is a standard way to implement them. If you are, and you want a to wait on more than 64 threads at one time, rather than create more than 64 threads, I would suggest splitting the array of handles passed in toWaitForMultipleObjectsinto several smaller arrays (64 or less handles each), and making several calls toWaitForMultipleObjects, one after the other, one for each array. -
Laing,James wrote: Is there a way to override/redefine the maximum number of threads that can be created by an individual application running on XP A process can easily create more than 64 threads (just look at Task Manager on a busy server). It's true that
MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTSdefines the maximum number of handles in the array passed in toWaitForMultipleObjects, butMAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTSis not related to how many threads a process can create, which was your original question. Laing,James wrote: I do not particulary want to redesign my application around thread pools Are you actually using thread pools? It sounds like you are, since passing thread handles into WaitForMutlipleObjects is a standard way to implement them. If you are, and you want a to wait on more than 64 threads at one time, rather than create more than 64 threads, I would suggest splitting the array of handles passed in toWaitForMultipleObjectsinto several smaller arrays (64 or less handles each), and making several calls toWaitForMultipleObjects, one after the other, one for each array.Thanks for the update. My application creates a new thread as required, so the number maybe considerably more than 64. I had not thought of simply splitting the array of handles. Thanks for the help.