我们可以通过使用ConcurrentHashMap和synchronisedHashmap和Hashtable来实现线程安全。但如果你看看他们的架构，就会发现有很多不同。

synchronisedHashmap和Hashtable

两者都将在对象级别上维护锁。所以如果你想执行任何操作，比如put/get，那么你必须先获得锁。同时，其他线程不允许执行任何操作。所以在同一时间，只有一个线程可以操作这个。所以这里的等待时间会增加。我们可以说，与ConcurrentHashMap相比，性能相对较低。

ConcurrentHashMap

It will maintain the lock at segment level. It has 16 segments and maintains the concurrency level as 16 by default. So at a time, 16 threads can be able to operate on ConcurrentHashMap. Moreover, read operation doesn't require a lock. So any number of threads can perform a get operation on it. If thread1 wants to perform put operation in segment 2 and thread2 wants to perform put operation on segment 4 then it is allowed here. Means, 16 threads can perform update(put/delete) operation on ConcurrentHashMap at a time. So that the waiting time will be less here. Hence the performance is relatively better than synchronisedHashmap and Hashtable.

根据您的需要，使用ConcurrentHashMap。它允许从多个线程并发修改Map，而不需要阻塞它们。synchronizedmap (map)创建了一个阻塞map，这会降低性能，但确保了一致性(如果使用得当)。

如果您需要确保数据的一致性，并且每个线程需要有一个最新的映射视图，则使用第二个选项。如果性能非常关键，并且每个线程只向映射中插入数据，读取频率较低，则使用第一种方法。

Hashtable的“可伸缩性问题”在Collections.synchronizedMap(Map)中以完全相同的方式呈现——它们使用非常简单的同步，这意味着同一时间只有一个线程可以访问映射。

当您有简单的插入和查找时，这不是什么大问题(除非您做得非常密集)，但是当您需要遍历整个Map时，这就变成了一个大问题，对于一个大型Map来说，这可能会花费很长时间——当一个线程这样做时，所有其他线程都必须等待，如果它们想要插入或查找任何东西。

ConcurrentHashMap使用非常复杂的技术来减少对同步的需求，并允许多线程在不同步的情况下进行并行读访问，更重要的是，它提供了一个不需要同步的迭代器，甚至允许在交互期间修改Map(尽管它不保证在迭代期间插入的元素是否会返回)。

我们可以通过使用ConcurrentHashMap和synchronisedHashmap和Hashtable来实现线程安全。但如果你看看他们的架构，就会发现有很多不同。

synchronisedHashmap和Hashtable

两者都将在对象级别上维护锁。所以如果你想执行任何操作，比如put/get，那么你必须先获得锁。同时，其他线程不允许执行任何操作。所以在同一时间，只有一个线程可以操作这个。所以这里的等待时间会增加。我们可以说，与ConcurrentHashMap相比，性能相对较低。

ConcurrentHashMap

It will maintain the lock at segment level. It has 16 segments and maintains the concurrency level as 16 by default. So at a time, 16 threads can be able to operate on ConcurrentHashMap. Moreover, read operation doesn't require a lock. So any number of threads can perform a get operation on it. If thread1 wants to perform put operation in segment 2 and thread2 wants to perform put operation on segment 4 then it is allowed here. Means, 16 threads can perform update(put/delete) operation on ConcurrentHashMap at a time. So that the waiting time will be less here. Hence the performance is relatively better than synchronisedHashmap and Hashtable.

ConcurrentHashMap

ConcurrentHashMap for performance-critical applications where there are far more write operations than there are read operations. It is thread safe without synchronizing the whole map. Reads can happen very fast while write is done with a lock. There is no locking at the object level. The locking is at a much finer granularity at a hashmap bucket level. ConcurrentHashMap doesn’t throw a ConcurrentModificationException if one thread tries to modify it while another is iterating over it. ConcurrentHashMap uses multitude of locks. read operations are non-blocking, whereas write operations take a lock on a particular segment or bucket.

SynchronizedHashMap

对象级同步。 每个读/写操作都需要获得锁。 锁定整个集合是一种性能开销。 这实际上只允许一个线程访问整个映射，并阻塞了所有其他线程。 这可能会引起争论。 SynchronizedHashMap返回迭代器，它在并发修改时快速失败。

Collection.synchronizedMap ()

Collections实用程序类提供了操作集合并返回包装集合的多态算法。它的synchronizedMap()方法提供了线程安全的功能。 当数据一致性至关重要时，我们需要使用Collections.synchronizedMap()。

源

两者之间的主要区别是ConcurrentHashMap将只锁定正在更新的部分数据，而其他部分数据可以由其他线程访问。但是，Collections.synchronizedMap()将在更新时锁定所有数据，其他线程只能在释放锁时访问数据。如果更新操作较多，读操作相对较少，则选择ConcurrentHashMap。

Also one other difference is that ConcurrentHashMap will not preserve the order of elements in the Map passed in. It is similar to HashMap when storing data. There is no guarantee that the element order is preserved. While Collections.synchronizedMap() will preserve the elements order of the Map passed in. For example, if you pass a TreeMap to ConcurrentHashMap, the elements order in the ConcurrentHashMap may not be the same as the order in the TreeMap, but Collections.synchronizedMap() will preserve the order.

此外，ConcurrentHashMap可以保证当一个线程更新映射而另一个线程遍历从映射中获得的迭代器时，不会抛出ConcurrentModificationException。但是，Collections.synchronizedMap()在此上不被保证。

有一篇文章展示了这两者的区别，还有ConcurrentSkipListMap。