title: Why the ArrayBlockingQueue is called a bounded queue while a LinkedBlockingQueue is called an unbounded blocking queue?
body: <p>As far as I know both the linked list and array can grow without bounds or am I wrong ? But when I have gone through the <a href="http://grepcode.com/file/repository.grepcode.com/java/root/jdk/openjdk/6-b14/java/util/concurrent/ThreadPoolExecutor.java#ThreadPoolExecutor" rel="noreferrer">documentation in the Executor Service</a> I see this :</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>Unbounded queues. Using an unbounded queue (for example a
    LinkedBlockingQueue without a predefined capacity) will cause new
    tasks to wait in the queue when all corePoolSize threads are busy.
    Thus, no more than corePoolSize threads will ever be created. (And the
    value of the maximumPoolSize therefore doesn't have any effect.)</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>So does the <code>Unbounded Queue</code> property changes when the <code>LinkedBlockingQueue</code> has a defined capacity ?</p>
  
  <p>And this written for <code>ArrayBlockingQueue</code>:</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>Bounded queues. A bounded queue (for example, an ArrayBlockingQueue)
    helps prevent resource exhaustion when used with finite
    maximumPoolSizes, but can be more difficult to tune and control. Queue
    sizes and maximum pool sizes may be traded off for each other: Using
    large queues and small pools minimizes CPU usage, OS resources, and
    context-switching overhead, but can lead to artificially low
    throughput. If tasks frequently block (for example if they are I/O
    bound), a system may be able to schedule time for more threads than
    you otherwise allow. Use of small queues generally requires larger
    pool sizes, which keeps CPUs busier but may encounter unacceptable
    scheduling overhead, which also decreases throughput.</p>
  </blockquote>