On Monday, 22 September 2014 at 09:45:23 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
Locking fibers to threads will cost you more than using
threadsafe features. One 300ms request can then starve waiting
fibers even if you have 7 free threads. That's bad for latency,
because then all fibers on that thread will get 300+ms in
latency.
I don't understand what you're getting at. Nothing in D locks
fibers to threads. In fact, the MultiScheduler I'm going to
write if the original Scheduler pull request is ever accepted
will not work this way. Granted, that means that use of
thread-local storage will be utterly broken instead of mostly
broken, but I think it's a fair exchange for not having a single
long-running fiber block other fibers.
