Java concurrency: Countdown latch vs Cyclic barrier

前端 未结 14 1920
隐瞒了意图╮
隐瞒了意图╮ 2020-11-29 14:44

I was reading through the java.util.concurrent API, and found that

  • CountDownLatch: A synchronization aid that allows one or more threads to wait
相关标签:
14条回答
  • 2020-11-29 15:00

    The main difference is documented right in the Javadocs for CountdownLatch. Namely:

    A CountDownLatch is initialized with a given count. The await methods block until the current count reaches zero due to invocations of the countDown() method, after which all waiting threads are released and any subsequent invocations of await return immediately. This is a one-shot phenomenon -- the count cannot be reset. If you need a version that resets the count, consider using a CyclicBarrier.

    source 1.6 Javadoc

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-11-29 15:01

    In the case of CyclicBarrier, as soon as ALL child threads begins calling barrier.await(), the Runnable is executed in the Barrier. The barrier.await in each child thread will take different lengh of time to finish, and they all finish at the same time.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-11-29 15:04

    In a nutshell, just to understand key functional differences between the two :

    public class CountDownLatch {
        private Object mutex = new Object();
        private int count;
    
        public CountDownLatch(int count) {
            this.count = count;
        }
    
        public void await() throws InterruptedException {
            synchronized (mutex) {
                while (count > 0) {
                    mutex.wait();
                }
            }
        }
    
        public void countDown() {
            synchronized (mutex) {
                if (--count == 0)
                    mutex.notifyAll();
            }
    
        }
    }
    

    and

    public class CyclicBarrier {
        private Object mutex = new Object();
        private int count;
    
        public CyclicBarrier(int count) {
            this.count = count;
        }
    
        public void await() throws InterruptedException {
            synchronized (mutex) {
                count--;
                while(count > 0)
                    mutex.wait();
                mutex.notifyAll();
            }
        }
    }
    

    except, of course, features like non-blocking, timed waiting, diagnostics and everything which has been in details explained in the above answers.

    The above classes are, however, fully functional and equivalent, within the provided functionality, to their correspondent namesakes.

    On a different note, CountDownLatch's inner class subclasses AQS, while CyclicBarrier uses ReentrantLock (my suspicion is it could be other way around or both could use AQS or both use Lock -- without any loss of performance efficiency)

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-11-29 15:08

    There's another difference.

    When using a CyclicBarrier, the assumption is that you specify the number of waiting threads that trigger the barrier. If you specify 5, you must have at least 5 threads to call await().

    When using a CountDownLatch, you specify the number of calls to countDown() that will result in all waiting threads being released. This means that you can use a CountDownLatch with only a single thread.

    "Why would you do that?", you may say. Imagine that you are using a mysterious API coded by someone else that performs callbacks. You want one of your threads to wait until a certain callback has been called a number of times. You have no idea which threads the callback will be called on. In this case, a CountDownLatch is perfect, whereas I can't think of any way to implement this using a CyclicBarrier (actually, I can, but it involves timeouts... yuck!).

    I just wish that CountDownLatch could be reset!

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-11-29 15:09

    One obvious difference is, only N threads can await on a CyclicBarrier of N to be release in one cycle. But unlimited number of threads can await on a CountDownLatch of N. The count down decrement can be done by one thread N times or N threads one time each or combinations.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-11-29 15:16

    @Kevin Lee and @Jon I tried CyclicBarrier with Optional Runnable. Looks like it runs in the beginning and after the CyclicBarrier is tipped. Here is the code and output

    static CyclicBarrier barrier;

        public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
            barrier = new CyclicBarrier(3, new Runnable() {
                @Override
                public void run() {
                    System.out.println("I run in the beginning and after the CyclicBarrier is tipped");
                }
            });
    
            new Worker().start();
            Thread.sleep(1000);
            new Worker().start();
            Thread.sleep(1000);
            new Worker().start();
            Thread.sleep(1000);
    
            System.out.println("Barrier automatically resets.");
    
            new Worker().start();
            Thread.sleep(1000);
            new Worker().start();
            Thread.sleep(1000);
            new Worker().start();
        }
    

    Output

    I run in the beginning and after the CyclicBarrier is tipped
    Let's play.
    Let's play.
    Let's play.
    Barrier automatically resets.
    I run in the beginning and after the CyclicBarrier is tipped
    Let's play.
    Let's play.
    Let's play.
    
    0 讨论(0)
提交回复
热议问题