[Improvement](brpc) Using a thread pool for RPC service avoiding std:mutex block brpc::bthread (#16639) #17056
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…:mutex block brpc::bthread (apache#16639) mainly include: - brpc service adds two types of thread pools. The number of "light" and "heavy" thread pools is different Classify the interfaces of be. Those related to data transmission are classified as heavy interfaces and others as light interfaces - Add some monitoring to the thread pool, including the queue size and the number of active threads. Use these - indicators to guide the configuration of the number of threads
github-actions
bot
added
the
kind/docs
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Proposed changes
Issue Number: close #xxx
Problem summary
cherry-pick #16639
Checklist(Required)
Further comments
If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion at dev@doris.apache.org by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...