有人能告诉我同步方法比同步块的优势与一个例子吗?
当前回答
As already said here synchronized block can use user-defined variable as lock object, when synchronized function uses only "this". And of course you can manipulate with areas of your function which should be synchronized. But everyone says that no difference between synchronized function and block which covers whole function using "this" as lock object. That is not true, difference is in byte code which will be generated in both situations. In case of synchronized block usage should be allocated local variable which holds reference to "this". And as result we will have a little bit larger size for function (not relevant if you have only few number of functions).
你可以在这里找到更详细的解释: http://www.artima.com/insidejvm/ed2/threadsynchP.html
其他回答
当java编译器将源代码转换为字节码时,它处理同步方法和同步块的方式非常不同。
当JVM执行一个同步方法时,执行线程识别出该方法的method_info结构体设置了ACC_SYNCHRONIZED标志,然后它自动获取对象的锁,调用该方法,并释放锁。如果发生异常,线程自动释放锁。
另一方面,同步方法块绕过了JVM对获取对象锁和异常处理的内置支持,并要求显式地用字节代码编写功能。如果读取带有同步块的方法的字节代码,您将看到十多个额外的操作来管理此功能。
这显示了生成同步方法和同步块的调用:
public class SynchronizationExample {
private int i;
public synchronized int synchronizedMethodGet() {
return i;
}
public int synchronizedBlockGet() {
synchronized( this ) {
return i;
}
}
}
synchronizedMethodGet()方法生成以下字节代码:
0: aload_0
1: getfield
2: nop
3: iconst_m1
4: ireturn
下面是synchronizedBlockGet()方法的字节代码:
0: aload_0
1: dup
2: astore_1
3: monitorenter
4: aload_0
5: getfield
6: nop
7: iconst_m1
8: aload_1
9: monitorexit
10: ireturn
11: astore_2
12: aload_1
13: monitorexit
14: aload_2
15: athrow
One significant difference between synchronized method and block is that, Synchronized block generally reduce scope of lock. As scope of lock is inversely proportional to performance, its always better to lock only critical section of code. One of the best example of using synchronized block is double checked locking in Singleton pattern where instead of locking whole getInstance() method we only lock critical section of code which is used to create Singleton instance. This improves performance drastically because locking is only required one or two times.
在使用同步方法时,如果混合使用静态同步方法和非静态同步方法,则需要格外小心。
Synchronizing with threads. 1) NEVER use synchronized(this) in a thread it doesn't work. Synchronizing with (this) uses the current thread as the locking thread object. Since each thread is independent of other threads, there is NO coordination of synchronization. 2) Tests of code show that in Java 1.6 on a Mac the method synchronization does not work. 3) synchronized(lockObj) where lockObj is a common shared object of all threads synchronizing on it will work. 4) ReenterantLock.lock() and .unlock() work. See Java tutorials for this.
The following code shows these points. It also contains the thread-safe Vector which would be substituted for the ArrayList, to show that many threads adding to a Vector do not lose any information, while the same with an ArrayList can lose information. 0) Current code shows loss of information due to race conditions A) Comment the current labeled A line, and uncomment the A line above it, then run, method loses data but it shouldn't. B) Reverse step A, uncomment B and // end block }. Then run to see results no loss of data C) Comment out B, uncomment C. Run, see synchronizing on (this) loses data, as expected. Don't have time to complete all the variations, hope this helps. If synchronizing on (this), or the method synchronization works, please state what version of Java and OS you tested. Thank you.
import java.util.*;
/** RaceCondition - Shows that when multiple threads compete for resources
thread one may grab the resource expecting to update a particular
area but is removed from the CPU before finishing. Thread one still
points to that resource. Then thread two grabs that resource and
completes the update. Then thread one gets to complete the update,
which over writes thread two's work.
DEMO: 1) Run as is - see missing counts from race condition, Run severa times, values change
2) Uncomment "synchronized(countLock){ }" - see counts work
Synchronized creates a lock on that block of code, no other threads can
execute code within a block that another thread has a lock.
3) Comment ArrayList, unComment Vector - See no loss in collection
Vectors work like ArrayList, but Vectors are "Thread Safe"
May use this code as long as attribution to the author remains intact.
/mf
*/
public class RaceCondition {
private ArrayList<Integer> raceList = new ArrayList<Integer>(); // simple add(#)
// private Vector<Integer> raceList = new Vector<Integer>(); // simple add(#)
private String countLock="lock"; // Object use for locking the raceCount
private int raceCount = 0; // simple add 1 to this counter
private int MAX = 10000; // Do this 10,000 times
private int NUM_THREADS = 100; // Create 100 threads
public static void main(String [] args) {
new RaceCondition();
}
public RaceCondition() {
ArrayList<Thread> arT = new ArrayList<Thread>();
// Create thread objects, add them to an array list
for( int i=0; i<NUM_THREADS; i++){
Thread rt = new RaceThread( ); // i );
arT.add( rt );
}
// Start all object at once.
for( Thread rt : arT ){
rt.start();
}
// Wait for all threads to finish before we can print totals created by threads
for( int i=0; i<NUM_THREADS; i++){
try { arT.get(i).join(); }
catch( InterruptedException ie ) { System.out.println("Interrupted thread "+i); }
}
// All threads finished, print the summary information.
// (Try to print this informaiton without the join loop above)
System.out.printf("\nRace condition, should have %,d. Really have %,d in array, and count of %,d.\n",
MAX*NUM_THREADS, raceList.size(), raceCount );
System.out.printf("Array lost %,d. Count lost %,d\n",
MAX*NUM_THREADS-raceList.size(), MAX*NUM_THREADS-raceCount );
} // end RaceCondition constructor
class RaceThread extends Thread {
public void run() {
for ( int i=0; i<MAX; i++){
try {
update( i );
} // These catches show when one thread steps on another's values
catch( ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException ai ){ System.out.print("A"); }
catch( OutOfMemoryError oome ) { System.out.print("O"); }
}
}
// so we don't lose counts, need to synchronize on some object, not primitive
// Created "countLock" to show how this can work.
// Comment out the synchronized and ending {, see that we lose counts.
// public synchronized void update(int i){ // use A
public void update(int i){ // remove this when adding A
// synchronized(countLock){ // or B
// synchronized(this){ // or C
raceCount = raceCount + 1;
raceList.add( i ); // use Vector
// } // end block for B or C
} // end update
} // end RaceThread inner class
} // end RaceCondition outter class
通常在方法级别上使用锁是不礼貌的。为什么要通过锁定整个方法来锁定一段不能访问任何共享资源的代码呢?因为每个对象都有一个锁,所以可以创建虚拟对象来实现块级同步。 块级的效率更高,因为它不锁定整个方法。
这里有一些例子
方法级
class MethodLevel {
//shared among threads
SharedResource x, y ;
public void synchronized method1() {
//multiple threads can't access
}
public void synchronized method2() {
//multiple threads can't access
}
public void method3() {
//not synchronized
//multiple threads can access
}
}
块级别
class BlockLevel {
//shared among threads
SharedResource x, y ;
//dummy objects for locking
Object xLock = new Object();
Object yLock = new Object();
public void method1() {
synchronized(xLock){
//access x here. thread safe
}
//do something here but don't use SharedResource x, y
// because will not be thread-safe
synchronized(xLock) {
synchronized(yLock) {
//access x,y here. thread safe
}
}
//do something here but don't use SharedResource x, y
//because will not be thread-safe
}//end of method1
}
(编辑)
对于像Vector和Hashtable这样的集合,当ArrayList或HashMap不同步时,它们是同步的,你需要设置synchronized关键字或调用Collections synchronized方法:
Map myMap = Collections.synchronizedMap (myMap); // single lock for the entire map
List myList = Collections.synchronizedList (myList); // single lock for the entire list
使用同步块,您可以有多个同步器,因此多个同时但不冲突的事情可以同时进行。
As already said here synchronized block can use user-defined variable as lock object, when synchronized function uses only "this". And of course you can manipulate with areas of your function which should be synchronized. But everyone says that no difference between synchronized function and block which covers whole function using "this" as lock object. That is not true, difference is in byte code which will be generated in both situations. In case of synchronized block usage should be allocated local variable which holds reference to "this". And as result we will have a little bit larger size for function (not relevant if you have only few number of functions).
你可以在这里找到更详细的解释: http://www.artima.com/insidejvm/ed2/threadsynchP.html
推荐文章
- 到底是什么导致了堆栈溢出错误?
- 为什么Android工作室说“等待调试器”如果我不调试?
- Java:路径vs文件
- ExecutorService,如何等待所有任务完成
- Maven依赖Servlet 3.0 API?
- 如何在IntelliJ IDEA中添加目录到应用程序运行概要文件中的类路径?
- getter和setter是糟糕的设计吗?相互矛盾的建议
- Android room persistent: AppDatabase_Impl不存在
- Java的String[]在Kotlin中等价于什么?
- Intellij IDEA上的System.out.println()快捷方式
- 使用Spring RestTemplate获取JSON对象列表
- Spring JPA选择特定的列
- URLEncoder不能翻译空格字符
- Java中的super()
- 如何转换JSON字符串映射<字符串,字符串>与杰克逊JSON