Deadlock happens if I use lambda in parallel stream but it doesn't happen if I use anonymous class instead? [duplicate]

Question

This question already has an answer here:

• Why does parallel stream with lambda in static initializer cause a deadlock? 3 answers

The following code leads to deadlock(on my pc):

public class Test {
    static {
        final int SUM = IntStream.range(0, 100)
                .parallel()
                .reduce((n, m) -> n + m)
                .getAsInt();
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println("Finished");
    }
}

But if I replace reduce lambda argument with anonymous class it doesn't lead to deadlock:

public class Test {
    static {
        final int SUM = IntStream.range(0, 100)
                .parallel()
                .reduce(new IntBinaryOperator() {
                    @Override
                    public int applyAsInt(int n, int m) {
                        return n + m;
                    }
                })
                .getAsInt();
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println("Finished");
    }
}

Could you explain that situation?

P.S.

I found that code(a bit different from previous):

public class Test {
    static {
        final int SUM = IntStream.range(0, 100)
                .parallel()
                .reduce(new IntBinaryOperator() {
                    @Override
                    public int applyAsInt(int n, int m) {
                        return sum(n, m);
                    }
                })
                .getAsInt();
    }

    private static int sum(int n, int m) {
        return n + m;
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println("Finished");
    }
}

works not stable. In most cases it hangs buts sometimes it finishes successfully:

I really not able to understand why this behaviour is not stable. Actually I retest first code snippet and behaviour the same. So the latest code is equals the first one.

To understand which threads are used I added following "logging":

public class Test {
    static {
        final int SUM = IntStream.range(0, 100)
                .parallel()
                .reduce((n, m) -> {
                    System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName());
                    return (n + m);
                })
                .getAsInt();
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println("Finished");
    }
}

For case when application finishes successfully I see following log:

main
main
main
main
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
main
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
main
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1
Finished

P.S. 2

I Undestand that reduce is enough complex operations. I found a simpler example to show that problem:

public class Test {
    static {
        System.out.println("static initializer: " + Thread.currentThread().getName());

        final long SUM = IntStream.range(0, 2)
                .parallel()
                .mapToObj(i -> {
                    System.out.println("map: " + Thread.currentThread().getName() + " " + i);
                    return i;
                })
                .count();
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println("Finished");
    }
}

for happy case(rare case) I seee following output:

static initializer: main
map: main 1
map: main 0
Finished

example of happy case for extended stream range:

static initializer: main
map: main 2
map: main 3
map: ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-2 4
map: ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-1 1
map: ForkJoinPool.commonPool-worker-3 0
Finished

example of case which leads to deadlock:

static initializer: main
map: main 1

It also leads to deadlock but not for each start.

Answer 1

The difference is that lambda body is written in the same Test class, i.e. a synthetic method

private static int lambda$static$0(int n, int m) {
    return n + m;
}

In the second case the implementation of the interface resides in a different Test$1 class. So the threads of a parallel stream do not call static methods of Test and thus do not depend on Test initialization.