Home/ Questions/Q 3313210
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-17T22:05:19+00:00

One of the main purposes of writing code in the asynchronous programming model (more

  • 0

One of the main purposes of writing code in the asynchronous programming model (more specifically – using callbacks instead of blocking the thread) is to minimize the number of blocking threads in the system.

For running threads , this goal is obvious, because of context switches and synchronization costs.

But what about blocked threads? why is it so important to reduce their number?

For example, when waiting for a response from a web server a thread is blocked and doesn’t take-up any CPU time and does not participate in any context switch.

So my question is:
other than RAM (about 1MB per thread ?) What other resources do blocked threads take-up?

And another more subjective question:
In what cases will this cost really justify the hassle of writing asynchronous code (the price could be, for example, splitting your nice coherent method to lots of beginXXX and EndXXX methods, and moving parameters and local variables to be class fields).

UPDATE – additional reasons I didn’t mention or didn’t give enough weight to:

  1. More threads means more locking on communal resources

  2. More threads means more creation and disposing of threads which is expensive

  3. The system can definitely run-out of threads/RAM and then stop servicing clients (in a web server scenario this can actually bring down the service)

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    So my question is: other than RAM (about 1MB per thread ?) What other resources do blocked threads take-up?

    This is one of the largest ones. That being said, there’s a reason that the ThreadPool in .NET allows so many threads per core – in 3.5 the default was 250 worker threads per core in the system. (In .NET 4, it depends on system information such as virtual address size, platform, etc. – there isn’t a fixed default now.) Threads, especially blocked threads, really aren’t that expensive…

    However, I would say, from a code management standpoint, it’s worth reducing the number of blocked threads. Every blocked thread is an operation that should, at some point, return and become unblocked. Having many of these means you have quite a complicated set of code to manage. Keeping this number reduced will help keep the code base simpler – and more maintainable.

    And another more subjective question: In what cases will this cost really justify the hassle of writing asynchronous code (the price could be, for example, splitting your nice coherent method to lots of beginXXX and EndXXX methods, and moving parameters and local variables to be class fields).

    Right now, it’s often a pain. It depends a lot on the scenario. The Task<T> class in .NET 4 dratically improves this for many scenarios, however. Using the TPL, it’s much less painful than it was previously using the APM (BeginXXX/EndXXX) or even the EAP.

    This is why the language designers are putting so much effort into improving this situation in the future. Their goals are to make async code much simpler to write, in order to allow it to be used more frequently.

    • 0