I agree that current default value of thread pool size is too small, but I'm not sure about the disadvantages of the current fixed thread pool. Do you mean if multiple service instances is deployed on the same machine, a fixed thread pool is not so flexible since the instances cannot clean up some idle business thread?
Yours sincerely Yao Haishi yhs0...@163.com On 1/24/2019 10:49，wjm wjm<zzz...@gmail.com> wrote： or default integrate only one ThreadPoolExecutor? because most customers TPS is not so high, no need to do this optimize wjm wjm <zzz...@gmail.com> 于2019年1月24日周四 上午10:35写道： currently we provide a default sync invocation executor: - default integrate two fixed thread pool - thread count for one pool is equals cpu count for most customers, thread count of one pool is too small, and fixed thread pool is not so good, so will change to: - default integrate two ThreadPoolExecutor - support to configure core/max thread count, keepAlive time and max queue size for one pool - default core thread: 25, same to tomcat - default max thread: 100, tomcat is 200, because we have 2 pool, so change to 100 - default keepAlive: 1 minute, same to tomcat - default max queue size: Integer.MAX_VALUE, same to tomcat
