Re:Why asynchronous Rust doesn't work
by adwn on Wednesday March 10, 2021 @12:59AM
(#26408270)
I think you're spot on. For 99% of the use cases, traditional threads are the way to go. It's only when you have a truly massive number of logical threads (>100k, or even >1M) not doing anything most of the time, that OS threads reach their limits due to their aggregate stack size. In other words: web services, where each server thread either waits for input from the client or for a database reply, and only if they have to handle hundreds of thousands of concurrent clients.
This is not a concern for most Rust users, but it is a concern for large companies that are potential patrons of an up-and-coming programming language. I'm not saying it's wrong to cater to their needs, rather that it's not something over which regular Rust users should lose sleep.
Re:Why asynchronous Rust doesn't work
by akvadrako on Wednesday March 10, 2021 @02:06AM
(#26408664)
You're right but even most big players can probably just use threads. If you are serving 1 million clients per VM you are probably taxed for other resources besides threads unless 99.99% of your clients are guaranteed to idle.
This is not a concern for most Rust users, but it is a concern for large companies that are potential patrons of an up-and-coming programming language. I'm not saying it's wrong to cater to their needs, rather that it's not something over which regular Rust users should lose sleep.