简短的总结:

总是更喜欢使用notifyAll()而不是notify()，除非你有一个大型并行应用程序，其中大量线程都在做同样的事情。

解释:

notify()[…醒来时还是单身 线程。因为notify()不允许指定线程 唤醒后，它只在大规模并行应用程序中有用 是指具有大量线程的程序，它们都执行类似的任务。 在这样的应用程序中，您不关心哪个线程被唤醒。

来源:https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/guardmeth.html

比较上述情况下的notify()和notifyAll():一个大型并行应用程序，其中线程在做相同的事情。如果在这种情况下调用notifyAll()， notifyAll()将导致大量线程的唤醒(即调度)，其中许多线程是不必要的(因为实际上只有一个线程可以继续，即被授予wait()、notify()或notifyAll()对象监视的线程被调用)，因此浪费计算资源。

因此，如果您的应用程序中没有大量线程并发地做同样的事情，请使用notifyAll()而不是notify()。为什么?因为，正如其他用户已经在这个论坛上回答的那样，notify()

唤醒正在此对象的监视器上等待的单个线程。[…] 选择是任意的，发生在自由裁量权 实现。

来源:Java SE8 API (https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/lang/Object.html#notify--)

Imagine you have a producer consumer application where consumers are ready (i.e. wait() ing) to consume, producers are ready (i.e. wait() ing) to produce and the queue of items (to be produced / consumed) is empty. In that case, notify() might wake up only consumers and never producers because the choice who is waken up is arbitrary. The producer consumer cycle wouldn't make any progress although producers and consumers are ready to produce and consume, respectively. Instead, a consumer is woken up (i.e. leaving the wait() status), doesn't take an item out of the queue because it's empty, and notify() s another consumer to proceed.

In contrast, notifyAll() awakens both producers and consumers. The choice who is scheduled depends on the scheduler. Of course, depending on the scheduler's implementation, the scheduler might also only schedule consumers (e.g. if you assign consumer threads a very high priority). However, the assumption here is that the danger of the scheduler scheduling only consumers is lower than the danger of the JVM only waking up consumers because any reasonably implemented scheduler doesn't make just arbitrary decisions. Rather, most scheduler implementations make at least some effort to prevent starvation.

这里有一个例子。运行它。然后将notifyAll()中的一个更改为notify()，看看会发生什么。

ProducerConsumerExample类

public class ProducerConsumerExample {

    private static boolean Even = true;
    private static boolean Odd = false;

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Dropbox dropbox = new Dropbox();
        (new Thread(new Consumer(Even, dropbox))).start();
        (new Thread(new Consumer(Odd, dropbox))).start();
        (new Thread(new Producer(dropbox))).start();
    }
}

Dropbox类

public class Dropbox {

    private int number;
    private boolean empty = true;
    private boolean evenNumber = false;

    public synchronized int take(final boolean even) {
        while (empty || evenNumber != even) {
            try {
                System.out.format("%s is waiting ... %n", even ? "Even" : "Odd");
                wait();
            } catch (InterruptedException e) { }
        }
        System.out.format("%s took %d.%n", even ? "Even" : "Odd", number);
        empty = true;
        notifyAll();

        return number;
    }

    public synchronized void put(int number) {
        while (!empty) {
            try {
                System.out.println("Producer is waiting ...");
                wait();
            } catch (InterruptedException e) { }
        }
        this.number = number;
        evenNumber = number % 2 == 0;
        System.out.format("Producer put %d.%n", number);
        empty = false;
        notifyAll();
    }
}

消费阶层

import java.util.Random;

public class Consumer implements Runnable {

    private final Dropbox dropbox;
    private final boolean even;

    public Consumer(boolean even, Dropbox dropbox) {
        this.even = even;
        this.dropbox = dropbox;
    }

    public void run() {
        Random random = new Random();
        while (true) {
            dropbox.take(even);
            try {
                Thread.sleep(random.nextInt(100));
            } catch (InterruptedException e) { }
        }
    }
}

生产类

import java.util.Random;

public class Producer implements Runnable {

    private Dropbox dropbox;

    public Producer(Dropbox dropbox) {
        this.dropbox = dropbox;
    }

    public void run() {
        Random random = new Random();
        while (true) {
            int number = random.nextInt(10);
            try {
                Thread.sleep(random.nextInt(100));
                dropbox.put(number);
            } catch (InterruptedException e) { }
        }
    }
}

我想提一下《Java并发实践》中解释的内容:

第一点，是Notify还是NotifyAll?

It will be NotifyAll, and reason is that it will save from signall hijacking.

If two threads A and B are waiting on different condition predicates of same condition queue and notify is called, then it is upto JVM to which thread JVM will notify. Now if notify was meant for thread A and JVM notified thread B, then thread B will wake up and see that this notification is not useful so it will wait again. And Thread A will never come to know about this missed signal and someone hijacked it's notification. So, calling notifyAll will resolve this issue, but again it will have performance impact as it will notify all threads and all threads will compete for same lock and it will involve context switch and hence load on CPU. But we should care about performance only if it is behaving correctly, if it's behavior itself is not correct then performance is of no use.

这个问题可以通过使用jdk 5中提供的显式锁定Lock的Condition对象来解决，因为它为每个条件谓词提供了不同的等待。在这里，它将表现正确，不会有性能问题，因为它将调用信号，并确保只有一个线程正在等待该条件

notify() -从对象的等待集中随机选择一个线程，并将其置于BLOCKED状态。对象的等待集中的其余线程仍然处于WAITING状态。

notifyAll() -将所有线程从对象的等待集移动到BLOCKED状态。使用notifyAll()后，共享对象的等待集中没有剩余线程，因为所有线程现在都处于BLOCKED状态，而不是WAITING状态。

BLOCKED—锁定获取阻塞。 WAITING -等待通知(或阻塞连接完成)。

notify()将唤醒一个线程，而notifyAll()将唤醒所有线程。据我所知，没有中间立场。但是如果你不确定notify()会对你的线程做什么，使用notifyAll()。每次都很灵验。

Notify将只通知处于等待状态的一个线程，而Notify all将通知处于等待状态的所有线程，现在所有被通知的线程和所有被阻塞的线程都有资格获得锁，其中只有一个线程将获得锁，所有其他线程(包括之前处于等待状态的线程)将处于阻塞状态。