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
在实际应用中,同步方法相对于同步块的优势在于它们更能抵抗白痴;因为您不能选择任意对象来锁定,所以您不能滥用synchronized方法语法来做一些愚蠢的事情,比如锁定字符串文字或锁定从线程下面更改的可变字段的内容。
另一方面,使用同步方法,您无法保护锁不被任何可以获得对象引用的线程获取。
因此,在方法上使用synchronized作为修饰符可以更好地保护你的奶牛免受伤害,而将synchronized块与私有final锁对象结合使用则可以更好地保护你自己的代码免受奶牛的伤害。
其他回答
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
来自Java规范摘要: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/andru/javaspec/17.doc.html
The synchronized statement (§14.17) computes a reference to an object; it then attempts to perform a lock action on that object and does not proceed further until the lock action has successfully completed. ... A synchronized method (§8.4.3.5) automatically performs a lock action when it is invoked; its body is not executed until the lock action has successfully completed. If the method is an instance method, it locks the lock associated with the instance for which it was invoked (that is, the object that will be known as this during execution of the body of the method). If the method is static, it locks the lock associated with the Class object that represents the class in which the method is defined. ...
基于这些描述,我想说以前的大多数答案都是正确的,同步方法可能对静态方法特别有用,否则您必须弄清楚如何获得“表示定义方法的类的Class对象”。
编辑:我原本以为这些是对实际Java规范的引用。澄清一下,本页只是对规范的总结/解释
我知道这是一个老问题,但通过快速阅读这里的回答,我并没有看到任何人提到同步方法有时可能是错误的锁。 摘自Java并发实践(第72页):
public class ListHelper<E> {
public List<E> list = Collections.syncrhonizedList(new ArrayList<>());
...
public syncrhonized boolean putIfAbsent(E x) {
boolean absent = !list.contains(x);
if(absent) {
list.add(x);
}
return absent;
}
上面的代码看起来是线程安全的。然而,现实并非如此。在这种情况下,锁在类的实例上获得。但是,该列表可能被另一个不使用该方法的线程修改。正确的方法是使用
public boolean putIfAbsent(E x) {
synchronized(list) {
boolean absent = !list.contains(x);
if(absent) {
list.add(x);
}
return absent;
}
}
上面的代码将阻止所有试图修改list的线程修改列表,直到同步块完成。
关于使用同步块的重要提示:小心你使用的锁对象!
上面user2277816的代码片段说明了这一点,将字符串字面值的引用用作锁定对象。 意识到字符串字面值在Java中是自动互缩的,您应该开始看到问题所在:在字面值“锁”上同步的每段代码都共享同一个锁!这很容易导致完全不相关的代码段发生死锁。
您需要注意的不仅仅是String对象。装箱的原语也是一种危险,因为autoboxing和valueOf方法可以重用相同的对象,这取决于值。
有关更多信息,请参阅: https://www.securecoding.cert.org/confluence/display/java/LCK01-J.+Do+not+synchronize+on+objects+that+may+be+reused
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。
推荐文章
- 在流中使用Java 8 foreach循环移动到下一项
- 访问限制:'Application'类型不是API(必需库rt.jar的限制)
- 用Java计算两个日期之间的天数
- 如何配置slf4j-simple
- 在Jar文件中运行类
- 带参数的可运行?
- 自动化invokerrequired代码模式
- 我如何得到一个字符串的前n个字符而不检查大小或出界?
- 我可以在Java中设置enum起始值吗?
- Java中的回调函数
- c#和Java中的泛型有什么不同?和模板在c++ ?
- 在Java中,流相对于循环的优势是什么?
- Jersey在未找到InjectionManagerFactory时停止工作
- 在Java流是peek真的只是调试?
- Recyclerview不调用onCreateViewHolder