thread-pool VS sobjectizer

Nope, it's definitely a problem with your code, not an external problem. This is an inevitable result when your threading scheme is not watertight. I don't have any code snippets since I'm just remembering what I've done in the past on projects, but if you can't design it to work yourself I suggest using a library. You said you've been "dealing with [multithreading] for some time now and think I have a decent understanding" but that doesn't sound like you really have a solid theoretical understanding of the subject, especially considering that it's a notoriously difficult subject. My recommendation is either to go back and plan out a watertight synchronization scheme on paper (may require finding some lecture series on multithreading theory), or to use an off-the-shelf thread pool library like this one I just found by googling thread pool library. I suggest the former if this is a hobby project, but if this code has a possibility of ever being used by other people I suggest doing the latter.

Hi, I am looking for a header-only C++14 (or lower) quality thread pool. Ideally, it would be similar to BS::thread_pool but in C++14. Most of them I find on GitHub are bloated (e.g. concurrencpp) or have many open Issues. Ideal usage would be similar to:

There are lots of them and many are built into the OS(e.g. GCD on mac's, Windows has a thread pool api, TBB on all of them...)

It would be neat if the github site https://github.com/bshoshany/thread-pool or the paper did some comparisons to the existing body out there.

Message Delivery Tracing aims to debug an application built on top of SObjectizer. In essence, it logs the primary stages of the message delivery process, allowing visibility into whether there is a suitable subscriber with the corresponding event handler.

An additional rationale for structuring cooperations in hierarchies is to facilitate the sharing and propagation of dispatchers. A recent update of SObjectizer includes new functionalities that allow access to both agent and cooperation dispatchers. This enhancement was prompted by feedback provided by a user and myself.

If a stop signal arrives, it will be enqueued at the end as a demand for image_producer_callback. This means, it will be processed after the other 6 demands currently in the queue. Maybe this is not an issue but in some cases it might be. At this point, another feature of SObjectizer is to consider: agent priorities. Essentially, this feature allows for the demands to be handled in different orders based on the priorities of agents. In this context, if we assign image_producer_callback a higher priority than others, the “stop signal” would be processed before the rest of the requests.

The real solution consists in using another slick feature of SObjectizer: mutable messages.

However, this kind of filtering is inefficient and might result in a significant run-time cost. Indeed, every empty cv::Mat follows all the message handling workflow, only to be thrown out. Although we expect that empty images will be sporadic, a more idiomatic approach exists: delivery filters.

SObjectizer’s agent states are quite sophisticated and provide some utilities that might be useful for developing a working solution. First of all, image_viewer can be modeled as a two-state agent:

An alternative way is using SObjectizer’s timers.

Those who came looking for actor model examples should check out sobjectizer

In sobjectizer the ownership is held by "environment" , while in rotor each thread must held appropriate context, when actor environment is running.

May be actor frameworks like caf, sobjectizer or rotor is something, that you are looking for.