哪个效率更高:Netty的HashedWheelTimer或Quartz的调度程序? [英] Which is more efficient: Netty's HashedWheelTimer or Quartz's scheduler?

问题描述

HashedWheelTimers 基于这篇1987年的论文有关传统计时器的消耗方式需要维护O(N)个处理(对于N个计时器)，但是散列轮可能会消耗O(1).我不确定Quartz的工作安排是在下面是经理计时器，还是在后台使用O(1)解决方案.

HashedWheelTimers are based on this 1987 paper about how traditional timers consume O(N) processing to maintain (for N timers), but hashed wheels can consume O(1). I'm unsure if Quartz's job scheduling just managers timers underneath, or actually uses an O(1) solution under the covers.

推荐答案

Quartz调度程序用于调度持久性作业.因此，当Quartz发生故障后又恢复正常运行时，它可以看到应该运行哪些作业，但是哪些却没有运行，并且可以选择运行它们.

The Quartz scheduler is designed for scheduling persistent jobs. So, when Quartz comes up after going down, it can see what jobs were supposed to run but didn't and optionally run th em.

HashedWheelTimer设计为可扩展到数千个计时器.他们正在解决两个非常不同的问题.

HashedWheelTimer is designed to scale to thousands of timers. They're solving two very different problems.

这篇关于哪个效率更高:Netty的HashedWheelTimer或Quartz的调度程序?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！