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

在同步方法的情况下,锁将在对象上获得。但是如果你使用同步块,你可以选择指定一个对象来获取锁。

例子:

    Class Example {
    String test = "abc";
    // lock will be acquired on String  test object.
    synchronized (test) {
        // do something
    }

   lock will be acquired on Example Object
   public synchronized void testMethod() {
     // do some thing
   } 

   }

其他回答

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。

唯一真正的区别是同步块可以选择在哪个对象上同步。同步方法只能使用'this'(或同步类方法的相应Class实例)。例如,它们在语义上是等价的:

synchronized void foo() {
  ...
}

void foo() {
    synchronized (this) {
      ...
    }
}

后者更灵活,因为它可以竞争任何对象(通常是成员变量)的关联锁。它也更细粒度,因为您可以在块之前和块之后执行并发代码,但仍然在方法中。当然,您也可以通过将并发代码重构为单独的非同步方法来轻松地使用同步方法。使用任何使代码更容易理解的方法。

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

在同步方法的情况下,锁将在对象上获得。但是如果你使用同步块,你可以选择指定一个对象来获取锁。

例子:

    Class Example {
    String test = "abc";
    // lock will be acquired on String  test object.
    synchronized (test) {
        // do something
    }

   lock will be acquired on Example Object
   public synchronized void testMethod() {
     // do some thing
   } 

   }

In general these are mostly the same other than being explicit about the object's monitor that's being used vs the implicit this object. One downside of synchronized methods that I think is sometimes overlooked is that in using the "this" reference to synchronize on you are leaving open the possibility of external objects locking on the same object. That can be a very subtle bug if you run into it. Synchronizing on an internal explicit Object or other existing field can avoid this issue, completely encapsulating the synchronization.