1.HashSet允许空对象。

2.树集不允许空对象。如果你试图添加空值，它将抛出一个NullPointerException。

3.HashSet比TreeSet快得多。

e.g.

 TreeSet<String> ts = new TreeSet<String>();
 ts.add(null); // throws NullPointerException

 HashSet<String> hs = new HashSet<String>();
 hs.add(null); // runs fine

import java.util.HashSet;
import java.util.Set;
import java.util.TreeSet;

public class HashTreeSetCompare {

    //It is generally faster to add elements to the HashSet and then
    //convert the collection to a TreeSet for a duplicate-free sorted
    //Traversal.

    //really? 
    O(Hash + tree set) > O(tree set) ??
    Really???? Why?



    public static void main(String args[]) {

        int size = 80000;
        useHashThenTreeSet(size);
        useTreeSetOnly(size);

    }

    private static void useTreeSetOnly(int size) {

        System.out.println("useTreeSetOnly: ");
        long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
        Set<String> sortedSet = new TreeSet<String>();

        for (int i = 0; i < size; i++) {
            sortedSet.add(i + "");
        }

        //System.out.println(sortedSet);
        long end = System.currentTimeMillis();

        System.out.println("useTreeSetOnly: " + (end - start));
    }

    private static void useHashThenTreeSet(int size) {

        System.out.println("useHashThenTreeSet: ");
        long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
        Set<String> set = new HashSet<String>();

        for (int i = 0; i < size; i++) {
            set.add(i + "");
        }

        Set<String> sortedSet = new TreeSet<String>(set);
        //System.out.println(sortedSet);
        long end = System.currentTimeMillis();

        System.out.println("useHashThenTreeSet: " + (end - start));
    }
}

A lot of answers have been given, based on technical considerations, especially around performance. According to me, choice between TreeSet and HashSet matters. But I would rather say the choice should be driven by conceptual considerations first. If, for the objects your need to manipulate, a natural ordering does not make sense, then do not use TreeSet. It is a sorted set, since it implements SortedSet. So it means you need to override function compareTo, which should be consistent with what returns function equals. For example if you have a set of objects of a class called Student, then I do not think a TreeSet would make sense, since there is no natural ordering between students. You can order them by their average grade, okay, but this is not a "natural ordering". Function compareTo would return 0 not only when two objects represent the same student, but also when two different students have the same grade. For the second case, equals would return false (unless you decide to make the latter return true when two different students have the same grade, which would make equals function have a misleading meaning, not to say a wrong meaning.) Please note this consistency between equals and compareTo is optional, but strongly recommended. Otherwise the contract of interface Set is broken, making your code misleading to other people, thus also possibly leading to unexpected behavior.

这个链接可能是关于这个问题的一个很好的信息来源。

TreeSet的一个尚未被提及的优点是它有更大的“局部性”，这是以下说法的简写:(1)如果两个条目在顺序上是相邻的，TreeSet将它们放在数据结构中彼此相邻的地方，因此在内存中也是如此;并且(2)这种布局利用了局部性原则，该原则说类似的数据通常被一个应用程序以相似的频率访问。

这与HashSet相反，HashSet将条目分布在内存中，而不管它们的键是什么。

当从硬盘读取的延迟成本是从缓存或RAM读取的延迟成本的数千倍，并且当数据确实是通过局部性访问时，TreeSet可能是更好的选择。

HashSet比TreeSet快得多(对于添加、删除和包含等大多数操作，HashSet是常量时间，而不是日志时间)，但不像TreeSet那样提供排序保证。

HashSet

该类为基本操作(添加、删除、包含和大小)提供恒定的时间性能。 它不能保证元素的顺序随时间保持不变 迭代性能取决于初始容量和HashSet的负载因子。 接受默认的负载因子是相当安全的，但您可能希望指定的初始容量大约是您期望该集增长的两倍。

TreeSet

保证基本操作(添加、删除和包含)的时间成本为log(n) 确保set的元素将被排序(升序，自然或由你通过它的构造函数指定)(实现SortedSet) 不为迭代性能提供任何调优参数 提供了一些方便的方法来处理有序集，如first()， last()， headSet()和tailSet()等

重要的几点:

Both guarantee duplicate-free collection of elements It is generally faster to add elements to the HashSet and then convert the collection to a TreeSet for a duplicate-free sorted traversal. None of these implementations are synchronized. That is if multiple threads access a set concurrently, and at least one of the threads modifies the set, it must be synchronized externally. LinkedHashSet is in some sense intermediate between HashSet and TreeSet. Implemented as a hash table with a linked list running through it, however,it provides insertion-ordered iteration which is not same as sorted traversal guaranteed by TreeSet.

因此，使用方法的选择完全取决于您的需要，但我认为，即使您需要一个有序的集合，那么您仍然应该使用HashSet来创建Set，然后将其转换为TreeSet。

例如:SortedSet<String> s = new TreeSet<String>(hashSet);

TreeSet是两个排序集合之一(另一个是 TreeMap)。它使用红黑树结构(但你知道)，并保证 元素会按照自然的顺序，按升序排列。可选地, 您可以使用构造函数构造TreeSet，该构造函数允许您为集合提供您的 自己制定顺序规则(而不是依赖于定义的顺序) 通过使用Comparable或Comparator)

LinkedHashSet是HashSet的有序版本 在所有元素之间维护一个双链接列表。使用这个类而不是HashSet 当你关心迭代顺序时。迭代HashSet时 顺序是不可预测的，而LinkedHashSet允许您迭代元素 按照它们被插入的顺序