3 ms·

I don’t really support this view. While doing anything creative with threading is in fact challenging, in Java it’s easy to safely boost performance with threa

I don’t really support this view. While doing anything creative with threading is in fact challenging, in Java it’s easy to safely boost performance with threading using parallel streams and concurrent data structures. Even in other languages like C/C++, it’s mostly worth it to design something up-front that is naturally parallelizable and find a safe and correct way to do it. And the incentive to parallelize is only increasing with the increasing thread counts of newer hardware. Sure, it’s scary, but there’s really no excuse to avoid running with threading, multiple processes, or multiple services.

jayd16 4y ago
In my experience I saw a bunch of novice devs using parallel streams for N<=100 lists and such, for much worse performance. Its certainly not foolproof either or it would just be the default.
- marginalia_nu 4y ago
  To be fair, whether parallel streams is useful isn't a function of N alone, but the time each operation takes. If it's a nontrivial calculation, then by all means. Although parallel streams are seldom the best option in terms of performance even for large N. They may often be faster than sequential processing for large N, but a more thought out approach is almost always faster still, often significantly so.