The Subtle Distinction Between notify() and notifyAll()
While the primary difference between notify() and notifyAll() lies in the number of waiting threads they awaken (one versus all), this raises another question:
Why does one thread always re-acquire the object lock?
In the general case, both notify() and notifyAll() do not specify which waiting thread will be selected to re-acquire the lock. The JVM or system thread scheduler makes this selection, which can be non-deterministic.
The Need for notifyAll()
However, using notify() in certain scenarios can lead to deadlock, as illustrated by the following example:
Producer/Consumer Class with notify()
public class ProducerConsumer { private final int MAX_SIZE = 1; // Buffer size private List<Object> buf = new ArrayList<>(); public synchronized void put(Object o) { while (buf.size() == MAX_SIZE) { wait(); } buf.add(o); notify(); } public synchronized Object get() { while (buf.size() == 0) { wait(); } Object o = buf.remove(0); notify(); return o; } }
Deadlock Scenario:
As a result, all three threads are waiting indefinitely, leading to deadlock.
The Solution: notifyAll()
To resolve this deadlock, one must use notifyAll() instead of notify() in the producer/consumer code. This ensures that all waiting threads are awakened, preventing deadlocks.
Recommendation:
For most scenarios, notifyAll() is the preferred method as it avoids potential deadlocks. If the specific scenario requires waking up only one specific waiting thread, then notify() can be used with caution.
The above is the detailed content of Why Does One Thread Always Reacquire the Object Lock After notify() or notifyAll()?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!