How do threading and concurrent futures compare in performance?

How do threading and concurrent futures compare in performance?

Threading allows multiple threads to run in parallel, while concurrent futures provides a higher-level interface for managing threads and processes. Generally, concurrent futures can simplify code and improve performance for I/O-bound tasks.

Can you give me an example of when to use each?

Sure! Use threading for lightweight tasks that require frequent context switching, like handling multiple I/O operations. Use concurrent futures for CPU-bound tasks where you want to manage a pool of workers efficiently.

What are the limitations of each approach?

Threading can lead to issues like race conditions and deadlocks if not managed properly. Concurrent futures, while easier to use, may introduce overhead due to task management, which can affect performance in very lightweight tasks.

Which one is generally faster?

It depends on the task. For I/O-bound tasks, concurrent futures often perform better due to its efficient management of threads. For CPU-bound tasks, threading might be faster if you can minimize context switching.