Home/ Questions/Q 93909
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-10T23:25:06+00:00

We have a process that needs to run every two hours. It’s a process

  • 0

We have a process that needs to run every two hours. It’s a process that needs to run on it’s own thread so as to not interrupt normal processing.

When it runs, it will download 100k records and verify them against a database. The framework to run this has a lot of objects managing this process. These objects only need to be around when the process is running.

What’s a better standard?

  1. Keep the thread in wait mode by letting it sleep until I need it again. Or,

  2. Delete it when it is done and create it the next time I need it? (System Timer Events.)

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. There is not that much difference between the two solutions. I tend to prefer the one where the thread is created each time.

    Having a thread lying around consumes resources (memory at least). In a garbage collected language, it may be easy to have some object retained in this thread, thus using even more memory. If you have not the thread laying around, all resources are freed and made available for two hours to the main process.

    When you want to stop your whole process, where your thread may be executing or not, you need to interrupt the thread cleanly. It is always difficult to interrupt a thread or knowing if it is sleeping or working. You may have some race conditions there. Having the thread started on demand relieves you from those potential problems: you know if you started the thread and in that case calling thread_join makes you wait until the thread is done.

    For those reasons, I would go for the thread on demand solution, even though the other one has no insurmontable problems.

    • 0