Hi Markus, and thank you for your question, which I think is a very relevant one.
There is no silver bullet here. It all depends on the problem at hand. One of the major questions to ask is what the aim of the solution is: are you optimizing latency, throughput, power efficiency, fairness, a certain SLA etc. If you have considered asynchronous programming, I would encourage you to instead take a look at virtual threads, which provide a much more robust programming model. I think this is, indeed, a best practice approach in this type of choices. If you are dealing with latency sensitive stuff, sometimes starting out with a busy wait (calling Thread.onSpinWait()) and then progressively backing off to yield() and wait() could be a good strategy. This can be combined with thread pinning and CPU isolation on the OS level to get improved latency metrics. Sometimes, event loops are a good choice in this domain. Best, Per Minborg ________________________________ From: core-libs-dev <core-libs-dev-r...@openjdk.org> on behalf of Chen Liang <chen.l.li...@oracle.com> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2025 10:42 PM To: Markus KARG <mar...@headcrashing.eu>; Archie Cobbs <archie.co...@gmail.com> Cc: core-libs-dev <core-libs-dev@openjdk.org> Subject: Re: Best Practice for Busy Waiting in Java Not a concurrency professional, but my first impression is whether to yield or spin depends on how costly the task you are waiting is - I know yield involves a context switch and can be problematic for small waits. In addition, in Java, many blocking happens in a way users cannot control - for example, class initialization. Those might be bigger bottlenecks compared to the explicit busy waits. Chen Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> ________________________________ From: core-libs-dev <core-libs-dev-r...@openjdk.org> on behalf of Markus KARG <mar...@headcrashing.eu> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2025 11:49:52 AM To: Archie Cobbs <archie.co...@gmail.com> Cc: core-libs-dev <core-libs-dev@openjdk.org> Subject: Re: Best Practice for Busy Waiting in Java Seems you misunderstood my question. It was *not* what is best to do. It was: "Does the core-libs team have a common-sense / best practice for busy-wait.". The latter is a clear and concise question, and the answer could be as simple as "yes" or "no". Am 15.06.2025 um 18:40 schrieb Archie Cobbs: Just MHO... This is kind of like asking "What's the best way to waste electricity?" It's a nebulous question until you specify what "best" means in this odd scenario.... -Archie On Sun, Jun 15, 2025 at 11:09 AM Markus KARG <mar...@headcrashing.eu<mailto:mar...@headcrashing.eu>> wrote: Recently I was asked by a programmer, what to do if there simply is no other way than actually busy-wait. I see several options: * Do nothing: Costs valuable CPU time and increases carbon footprint. * Do a power-nap: Thread.sleep(1) * Be fair: Thread.yield() gives other threads a chance to execute in this time slot. * Be eco-friendly: Thread.onSpinWait() could reduce carbon footprint. * A combination of that, like "Thread.yield(); Thread.onSpinWait();" As all of that has its pros and cons, and as all of that works differently on each hardware platform, I do wonder if there is some common sense / best practice for busy wait (other than "Replace it using async") in the core-libs team? Thanks! -Markus -- Archie L. Cobbs
