Long story short, this is 100% possible, but you are limited to how ever many threads you have (-1 if you want any other queues/async await, etc).
While a fix would be great, I don't expect it since it's basically an issue of the runloop occupying an entire thread and that seems pretty fundamental to the library. Instead, I just think it should be noted or documented somewhere, if it's not already.
more info: I'm using this to create mock server endpoints where each test starts its own server/port combo. I also am configuring my tests to run in parallel, so naturally that can result in many servers running simultaneously. It's a bit sad that I can't have hundreds running side by side at the same time, but honestly not a huge issue either.
Long story short, this is 100% possible, but you are limited to how ever many threads you have (-1 if you want any other queues/async await, etc).
While a fix would be great, I don't expect it since it's basically an issue of the runloop occupying an entire thread and that seems pretty fundamental to the library. Instead, I just think it should be noted or documented somewhere, if it's not already.
more info: I'm using this to create mock server endpoints where each test starts its own server/port combo. I also am configuring my tests to run in parallel, so naturally that can result in many servers running simultaneously. It's a bit sad that I can't have hundreds running side by side at the same time, but honestly not a huge issue either.