MSDN文档是这么说的
public class SomeObject
{
public void SomeOperation()
{
lock(this)
{
//Access instance variables
}
}
}
是“如果实例可以公开访问，则会出现问题”。我想知道为什么?这是因为锁持有的时间比需要的时间长吗?还是有更阴险的原因?
当前回答
在lock语句中使用这是一种糟糕的形式，因为它通常不受您的控制，其他人可能会锁定该对象。
为了正确地计划并行操作，应该特别注意考虑可能的死锁情况，而拥有未知数量的锁入口点则会妨碍这一点。例如，任何具有对象引用的人都可以在对象设计者/创建者不知道的情况下锁定它。这增加了多线程解决方案的复杂性，并可能影响它们的正确性。
私有字段通常是更好的选择，因为编译器会强制对其进行访问限制，并且它会封装锁定机制。使用这种方法会将部分锁定实现暴露给公众，从而违反了封装。同样不清楚的是，您是否将获得此锁，除非它已被记录。即使这样，依靠文档来防止问题也是次优的。
最后，有一个常见的误解，认为lock(this)实际上修改了作为参数传递的对象，并以某种方式使其只读或不可访问。这是错误的。作为参数传递给lock的对象仅仅充当一个键。如果一把锁已经被锁在那把钥匙上了，那就不能锁;否则，允许使用锁。
这就是为什么在lock语句中使用字符串作为键是不好的，因为它们是不可变的，并且可以在应用程序的各个部分之间共享/访问。你应该使用一个私有变量，一个Object实例就可以了。
以运行下面的c#代码为例。
public class Person
{
public int Age { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public void LockThis()
{
lock (this)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(10000);
}
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var nancy = new Person {Name = "Nancy Drew", Age = 15};
var a = new Thread(nancy.LockThis);
a.Start();
var b = new Thread(Timewarp);
b.Start(nancy);
Thread.Sleep(10);
var anotherNancy = new Person { Name = "Nancy Drew", Age = 50 };
var c = new Thread(NameChange);
c.Start(anotherNancy);
a.Join();
Console.ReadLine();
}
static void Timewarp(object subject)
{
var person = subject as Person;
if (person == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("subject");
// A lock does not make the object read-only.
lock (person.Name)
{
while (person.Age <= 23)
{
// There will be a lock on 'person' due to the LockThis method running in another thread
if (Monitor.TryEnter(person, 10) == false)
{
Console.WriteLine("'this' person is locked!");
}
else Monitor.Exit(person);
person.Age++;
if(person.Age == 18)
{
// Changing the 'person.Name' value doesn't change the lock...
person.Name = "Nancy Smith";
}
Console.WriteLine("{0} is {1} years old.", person.Name, person.Age);
}
}
}
static void NameChange(object subject)
{
var person = subject as Person;
if (person == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("subject");
// You should avoid locking on strings, since they are immutable.
if (Monitor.TryEnter(person.Name, 30) == false)
{
Console.WriteLine("Failed to obtain lock on 50 year old Nancy, because Timewarp(object) locked on string \"Nancy Drew\".");
}
else Monitor.Exit(person.Name);
if (Monitor.TryEnter("Nancy Drew", 30) == false)
{
Console.WriteLine("Failed to obtain lock using 'Nancy Drew' literal, locked by 'person.Name' since both are the same object thanks to inlining!");
}
else Monitor.Exit("Nancy Drew");
if (Monitor.TryEnter(person.Name, 10000))
{
string oldName = person.Name;
person.Name = "Nancy Callahan";
Console.WriteLine("Name changed from '{0}' to '{1}'.", oldName, person.Name);
}
else Monitor.Exit(person.Name);
}
}
控制台输出
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Drew is 16 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Drew is 17 years old.
Failed to obtain lock on 50 year old Nancy, because Timewarp(object) locked on string "Nancy Drew".
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 18 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 19 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 20 years old.
Failed to obtain lock using 'Nancy Drew' literal, locked by 'person.Name' since both are the same object thanks to inlining!
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 21 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 22 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 23 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 24 years old.
Name changed from 'Nancy Drew' to 'Nancy Callahan'.
其他回答
这里也有一些关于这个的很好的讨论:这是互斥锁的正确使用吗?
在lock语句中使用这是一种糟糕的形式，因为它通常不受您的控制，其他人可能会锁定该对象。
为了正确地计划并行操作，应该特别注意考虑可能的死锁情况，而拥有未知数量的锁入口点则会妨碍这一点。例如，任何具有对象引用的人都可以在对象设计者/创建者不知道的情况下锁定它。这增加了多线程解决方案的复杂性，并可能影响它们的正确性。
私有字段通常是更好的选择，因为编译器会强制对其进行访问限制，并且它会封装锁定机制。使用这种方法会将部分锁定实现暴露给公众，从而违反了封装。同样不清楚的是，您是否将获得此锁，除非它已被记录。即使这样，依靠文档来防止问题也是次优的。
最后，有一个常见的误解，认为lock(this)实际上修改了作为参数传递的对象，并以某种方式使其只读或不可访问。这是错误的。作为参数传递给lock的对象仅仅充当一个键。如果一把锁已经被锁在那把钥匙上了，那就不能锁;否则，允许使用锁。
这就是为什么在lock语句中使用字符串作为键是不好的，因为它们是不可变的，并且可以在应用程序的各个部分之间共享/访问。你应该使用一个私有变量，一个Object实例就可以了。
以运行下面的c#代码为例。
public class Person
{
public int Age { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public void LockThis()
{
lock (this)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(10000);
}
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var nancy = new Person {Name = "Nancy Drew", Age = 15};
var a = new Thread(nancy.LockThis);
a.Start();
var b = new Thread(Timewarp);
b.Start(nancy);
Thread.Sleep(10);
var anotherNancy = new Person { Name = "Nancy Drew", Age = 50 };
var c = new Thread(NameChange);
c.Start(anotherNancy);
a.Join();
Console.ReadLine();
}
static void Timewarp(object subject)
{
var person = subject as Person;
if (person == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("subject");
// A lock does not make the object read-only.
lock (person.Name)
{
while (person.Age <= 23)
{
// There will be a lock on 'person' due to the LockThis method running in another thread
if (Monitor.TryEnter(person, 10) == false)
{
Console.WriteLine("'this' person is locked!");
}
else Monitor.Exit(person);
person.Age++;
if(person.Age == 18)
{
// Changing the 'person.Name' value doesn't change the lock...
person.Name = "Nancy Smith";
}
Console.WriteLine("{0} is {1} years old.", person.Name, person.Age);
}
}
}
static void NameChange(object subject)
{
var person = subject as Person;
if (person == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("subject");
// You should avoid locking on strings, since they are immutable.
if (Monitor.TryEnter(person.Name, 30) == false)
{
Console.WriteLine("Failed to obtain lock on 50 year old Nancy, because Timewarp(object) locked on string \"Nancy Drew\".");
}
else Monitor.Exit(person.Name);
if (Monitor.TryEnter("Nancy Drew", 30) == false)
{
Console.WriteLine("Failed to obtain lock using 'Nancy Drew' literal, locked by 'person.Name' since both are the same object thanks to inlining!");
}
else Monitor.Exit("Nancy Drew");
if (Monitor.TryEnter(person.Name, 10000))
{
string oldName = person.Name;
person.Name = "Nancy Callahan";
Console.WriteLine("Name changed from '{0}' to '{1}'.", oldName, person.Name);
}
else Monitor.Exit(person.Name);
}
}
控制台输出
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Drew is 16 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Drew is 17 years old.
Failed to obtain lock on 50 year old Nancy, because Timewarp(object) locked on string "Nancy Drew".
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 18 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 19 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 20 years old.
Failed to obtain lock using 'Nancy Drew' literal, locked by 'person.Name' since both are the same object thanks to inlining!
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 21 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 22 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 23 years old.
'this' person is locked!
Nancy Smith is 24 years old.
Name changed from 'Nancy Drew' to 'Nancy Callahan'.
如果在共享资源上锁定，则this指针上的锁定可能很糟糕。共享资源可以是一个静态变量，也可以是计算机上的一个文件——即在类的所有用户之间共享的一些东西。原因是，每次实例化类时，this指针将包含对内存中某个位置的不同引用。在一个类的实例中锁定这个和在另一个类的实例中锁定这个是不同的。
请检查这段代码，了解我的意思。在控制台应用程序的主程序中添加以下代码:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
TestThreading();
Console.ReadLine();
}
public static void TestThreading()
{
Random rand = new Random();
Thread[] threads = new Thread[10];
TestLock.balance = 100000;
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
TestLock tl = new TestLock();
Thread t = new Thread(new ThreadStart(tl.WithdrawAmount));
threads[i] = t;
}
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
threads[i].Start();
}
Console.Read();
}
创建一个如下所示的新类。
class TestLock
{
public static int balance { get; set; }
public static readonly Object myLock = new Object();
public void Withdraw(int amount)
{
// Try both locks to see what I mean
// lock (this)
lock (myLock)
{
Random rand = new Random();
if (balance >= amount)
{
Console.WriteLine("Balance before Withdrawal : " + balance);
Console.WriteLine("Withdraw : -" + amount);
balance = balance - amount;
Console.WriteLine("Balance after Withdrawal : " + balance);
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("Can't process your transaction, current balance is : " + balance + " and you tried to withdraw " + amount);
}
}
}
public void WithdrawAmount()
{
Random rand = new Random();
Withdraw(rand.Next(1, 100) * 100);
}
}
这里是一个程序的运行锁定这个。
Balance before Withdrawal : 100000
Withdraw : -5600
Balance after Withdrawal : 94400
Balance before Withdrawal : 100000
Balance before Withdrawal : 100000
Withdraw : -5600
Balance after Withdrawal : 88800
Withdraw : -5600
Balance after Withdrawal : 83200
Balance before Withdrawal : 83200
Withdraw : -9100
Balance after Withdrawal : 74100
Balance before Withdrawal : 74100
Withdraw : -9100
Balance before Withdrawal : 74100
Withdraw : -9100
Balance after Withdrawal : 55900
Balance after Withdrawal : 65000
Balance before Withdrawal : 55900
Withdraw : -9100
Balance after Withdrawal : 46800
Balance before Withdrawal : 46800
Withdraw : -2800
Balance after Withdrawal : 44000
Balance before Withdrawal : 44000
Withdraw : -2800
Balance after Withdrawal : 41200
Balance before Withdrawal : 44000
Withdraw : -2800
Balance after Withdrawal : 38400
下面是在myLock上锁定程序的运行。
Balance before Withdrawal : 100000
Withdraw : -6600
Balance after Withdrawal : 93400
Balance before Withdrawal : 93400
Withdraw : -6600
Balance after Withdrawal : 86800
Balance before Withdrawal : 86800
Withdraw : -200
Balance after Withdrawal : 86600
Balance before Withdrawal : 86600
Withdraw : -8500
Balance after Withdrawal : 78100
Balance before Withdrawal : 78100
Withdraw : -8500
Balance after Withdrawal : 69600
Balance before Withdrawal : 69600
Withdraw : -8500
Balance after Withdrawal : 61100
Balance before Withdrawal : 61100
Withdraw : -2200
Balance after Withdrawal : 58900
Balance before Withdrawal : 58900
Withdraw : -2200
Balance after Withdrawal : 56700
Balance before Withdrawal : 56700
Withdraw : -2200
Balance after Withdrawal : 54500
Balance before Withdrawal : 54500
Withdraw : -500
Balance after Withdrawal : 54000
关于它有一篇非常好的文章http://bytes.com/topic/c-sharp/answers/249277-dont-lock-type-objects，作者是Rico Mariani，他是Microsoft®.NET运行时的性能架构师
摘录:
这里的基本问题是您不拥有类型对象，而您 不知道还有谁能拿到。总的来说，这是一个非常糟糕的主意 依赖于锁定一个不是你创建的对象，也不知道还有谁 可能是存取。这样做会导致僵局。最安全的方法是 只锁定私有对象。
请参考下面的链接，它解释了为什么锁(这)不是一个好主意。
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/threading/managed-threading-best-practices
所以解决方案是添加一个私有对象，例如，lockObject到类中，并将代码区域放在lock语句中，如下所示:
lock (lockObject)
{
...
}
