<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Project-Loom on dplabs — Software Engineering &amp; Technology Consultancy</title>
		<link>https://dplabs.tech/tags/project-loom/</link>
		<description>Recent content in Project-Loom on dplabs — Software Engineering &amp; Technology Consultancy</description>
		<generator>Hugo</generator>
		<language>en-us</language>
		
		
		
		
			<lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
			<atom:link href="https://dplabs.tech/tags/project-loom/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
			<item>
				<title>Virtual Threads in Java 21: What They Solve and What They Don&#39;t</title>
				<link>https://dplabs.tech/blog/virtual-threads-java-21/</link>
				<pubDate>Mon, 04 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<guid>https://dplabs.tech/blog/virtual-threads-java-21/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;Virtual threads were the most anticipated Java feature in years. Project Loom&amp;rsquo;s promise was simple: write blocking code that scales like non-blocking code. Java 21 delivered them as a finalized, production-ready feature. They work. The caveats matter.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2 id=&#34;the-problem-virtual-threads-solve&#34;&gt;The Problem Virtual Threads Solve&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Traditional Java concurrency has a fundamental constraint: &lt;strong&gt;platform threads are expensive&lt;/strong&gt;. Each platform thread maps 1:1 to an OS thread. OS threads consume roughly 1MB of stack space by default and are expensive to create and context-switch.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
