問題描述
我有一個(gè)類,我在 updateLiveSockets()
方法內(nèi)每 30 秒從單個(gè)后臺(tái)線程填充地圖 liveSocketsByDatacenter
,然后我有一個(gè)方法 getNextSocket()
將被多個(gè)讀取器線程調(diào)用以獲取可用的活動(dòng)套接字,該套接字使用相同的映射來獲取此信息.
I have a class in which I am populating a map liveSocketsByDatacenter
from a single background thread every 30 seconds inside updateLiveSockets()
method and then I have a method getNextSocket()
which will be called by multiple reader threads to get a live socket available which uses the same map to get this information.
public class SocketManager {
private static final Random random = new Random();
private final ScheduledExecutorService scheduler = Executors.newSingleThreadScheduledExecutor();
private final AtomicReference<Map<Datacenters, List<SocketHolder>>> liveSocketsByDatacenter =
new AtomicReference<>(Collections.unmodifiableMap(new HashMap<>()));
private final ZContext ctx = new ZContext();
// Lazy Loaded Singleton Pattern
private static class Holder {
private static final SocketManager instance = new SocketManager();
}
public static SocketManager getInstance() {
return Holder.instance;
}
private SocketManager() {
connectToZMQSockets();
scheduler.scheduleAtFixedRate(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
updateLiveSockets();
}
}, 30, 30, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
}
// during startup, making a connection and populate once
private void connectToZMQSockets() {
Map<Datacenters, ImmutableList<String>> socketsByDatacenter = Utils.SERVERS;
// The map in which I put all the live sockets
Map<Datacenters, List<SocketHolder>> updatedLiveSocketsByDatacenter = new HashMap<>();
for (Map.Entry<Datacenters, ImmutableList<String>> entry : socketsByDatacenter.entrySet()) {
List<SocketHolder> addedColoSockets = connect(entry.getKey(), entry.getValue(), ZMQ.PUSH);
updatedLiveSocketsByDatacenter.put(entry.getKey(),
Collections.unmodifiableList(addedColoSockets));
}
// Update the map content
this.liveSocketsByDatacenter.set(Collections.unmodifiableMap(updatedLiveSocketsByDatacenter));
}
private List<SocketHolder> connect(Datacenters colo, List<String> addresses, int socketType) {
List<SocketHolder> socketList = new ArrayList<>();
for (String address : addresses) {
try {
Socket client = ctx.createSocket(socketType);
// Set random identity to make tracing easier
String identity = String.format("%04X-%04X", random.nextInt(), random.nextInt());
client.setIdentity(identity.getBytes(ZMQ.CHARSET));
client.setTCPKeepAlive(1);
client.setSendTimeOut(7);
client.setLinger(0);
client.connect(address);
SocketHolder zmq = new SocketHolder(client, ctx, address, true);
socketList.add(zmq);
} catch (Exception ex) {
// log error
}
}
return socketList;
}
// this method will be called by multiple threads to get the next live socket
// is there any concurrency or thread safety issue or race condition here?
public Optional<SocketHolder> getNextSocket() {
// For the sake of consistency make sure to use the same map instance
// in the whole implementation of my method by getting my entries
// from the local variable instead of the member variable
Map<Datacenters, List<SocketHolder>> liveSocketsByDatacenter =
this.liveSocketsByDatacenter.get();
Optional<SocketHolder> liveSocket = Optional.absent();
List<Datacenters> dcs = Datacenters.getOrderedDatacenters();
for (Datacenters dc : dcs) {
liveSocket = getLiveSocket(liveSocketsByDatacenter.get(dc));
if (liveSocket.isPresent()) {
break;
}
}
return liveSocket;
}
// is there any concurrency or thread safety issue or race condition here?
private Optional<SocketHolder> getLiveSocketX(final List<SocketHolder> endpoints) {
if (!CollectionUtils.isEmpty(endpoints)) {
// The list of live sockets
List<SocketHolder> liveOnly = new ArrayList<>(endpoints.size());
for (SocketHolder obj : endpoints) {
if (obj.isLive()) {
liveOnly.add(obj);
}
}
if (!liveOnly.isEmpty()) {
// The list is not empty so we shuffle it an return the first element
Collections.shuffle(liveOnly);
return Optional.of(liveOnly.get(0));
}
}
return Optional.absent();
}
// Added the modifier synchronized to prevent concurrent modification
// it is needed because to build the new map we first need to get the
// old one so both must be done atomically to prevent concistency issues
private synchronized void updateLiveSockets() {
Map<Datacenters, ImmutableList<String>> socketsByDatacenter = Utils.SERVERS;
// Initialize my new map with the current map content
Map<Datacenters, List<SocketHolder>> liveSocketsByDatacenter =
new HashMap<>(this.liveSocketsByDatacenter.get());
for (Entry<Datacenters, ImmutableList<String>> entry : socketsByDatacenter.entrySet()) {
List<SocketHolder> liveSockets = liveSocketsByDatacenter.get(entry.getKey());
List<SocketHolder> liveUpdatedSockets = new ArrayList<>();
for (SocketHolder liveSocket : liveSockets) { // LINE A
Socket socket = liveSocket.getSocket();
String endpoint = liveSocket.getEndpoint();
Map<byte[], byte[]> holder = populateMap();
Message message = new Message(holder, Partition.COMMAND);
boolean status = SendToSocket.getInstance().execute(message.getAdd(), holder, socket);
boolean isLive = (status) ? true : false;
// is there any problem the way I am using `SocketHolder` class?
SocketHolder zmq = new SocketHolder(socket, liveSocket.getContext(), endpoint, isLive);
liveUpdatedSockets.add(zmq);
}
liveSocketsByDatacenter.put(entry.getKey(),
Collections.unmodifiableList(liveUpdatedSockets));
}
this.liveSocketsByDatacenter.set(Collections.unmodifiableMap(liveSocketsByDatacenter));
}
}
正如你在我的課堂上看到的那樣:
As you can see in my class:
- 從每 30 秒運(yùn)行一次的單個(gè)后臺(tái)線程,我用
updateLiveSockets()
方法中的所有活動(dòng)套接字填充liveSocketsByDatacenter
映射. - 然后從多個(gè)線程中,我調(diào)用
getNextSocket()
方法給我一個(gè)可用的活動(dòng)套接字,它使用liveSocketsByDatacenter
映射來獲取所需的信息.李>
- From a single background thread which runs every 30 seconds, I populate
liveSocketsByDatacenter
map with all the live sockets inupdateLiveSockets()
method. - And then from multiple threads, I call the
getNextSocket()
method to give me a live socket available which uses aliveSocketsByDatacenter
map to get the required information.
我的代碼運(yùn)行良好,沒有任何問題,我想看看是否有更好或更有效的方法來編寫它.我還想就線程安全問題或任何競(jìng)爭(zhēng)條件(如果有的話)發(fā)表意見,但到目前為止我還沒有看到任何問題,但我可能是錯(cuò)的.
I have my code working fine without any issues and wanted to see if there is any better or more efficient way to write this. I also wanted to get an opinion on thread safety issues or any race conditions if any are there, but so far I haven't seen any but I could be wrong.
我最擔(dān)心的是 updateLiveSockets()
方法和 getLiveSocketX()
方法.我在 LINE A 迭代 liveSockets
這是 SocketHolder
的 List
然后創(chuàng)建一個(gè)新的 SocketHolder
對(duì)象并添加到另一個(gè)新列表.這里可以嗎?
I am mostly worried about updateLiveSockets()
method and getLiveSocketX()
method. I am iterating liveSockets
which is a List
of SocketHolder
at LINE A and then making a new SocketHolder
object and adding to another new list. Is this ok here?
注意: SocketHolder
是一個(gè)不可變的類.你可以忽略我擁有的 ZeroMQ
東西.
Note: SocketHolder
is an immutable class. And you can ignore ZeroMQ
stuff I have.
推薦答案
您使用以下同步技術(shù).
- 帶有實(shí)時(shí)套接字?jǐn)?shù)據(jù)的地圖位于原子引用后面,這允許安全地切換地圖.
updateLiveSockets()
方法是同步的(隱含在此),這將防止兩個(gè)線程同時(shí)切換地圖.- 如果在
getNextSocket()
方法期間發(fā)生切換,請(qǐng)?jiān)谑褂玫貓D時(shí)對(duì)地圖進(jìn)行本地引用以避免混淆.
- The map with live socket data is behind an atomic reference, this allows safely switching the map.
- The
updateLiveSockets()
method is synchronized (implicitly on this), this will prevent switching the map by two threads simultaneously. - You make a local reference to the map when using it to avoid mixups if the switch happens during the
getNextSocket()
method.
它像現(xiàn)在一樣是線程安全的嗎?
線程安全始終取決于共享可變數(shù)據(jù)是否正確同步.在這種情況下,共享的可變數(shù)據(jù)是數(shù)據(jù)中心到其 SocketHolders 列表的映射.
Thread safety always hinges on whether there is proper synchronization on shared mutable data. In this case the shared mutable data is the map of datacenters to their list of SocketHolders.
地圖位于AtomicReference
中,并且制作本地副本以供使用這一事實(shí)足以在地圖上進(jìn)行同步.您的方法采用地圖的一個(gè)版本并使用它,由于 AtomicReference
的性質(zhì),切換版本是線程安全的.這也可以通過將成員字段設(shè)置為地圖 volatile
來實(shí)現(xiàn),因?yàn)槟龅闹皇歉乱?您無需對(duì)其執(zhí)行任何檢查然后執(zhí)行操作).
The fact that the map is in an AtomicReference
, and making a local copy for use is enough synchronization on the map. Your methods take a version of the map and use that, switching versions is thread safe due to the nature of AtomicReference
. This could also have been achieved with just making the member field for the map volatile
, as all you do is update the reference (you don't do any check-then-act operations on it).
由于 scheduleAtFixedRate()
保證傳遞的 Runnable
不會(huì)與自身并發(fā)運(yùn)行,所以 updateLiveSockets() 上的
synchronized
不是必需的,但是,它也不會(huì)造成任何真正的傷害.
As scheduleAtFixedRate()
guarantees that the passed Runnable
will not be run concurrently with itself, the synchronized
on updateLiveSockets()
is not needed, however, it also doesn't do any real harm.
所以是的,這個(gè)類是線程安全的,因?yàn)樗?
So yes, this class is thread safe, as it is.
但是,SocketHolder
是否可以被多個(gè)線程同時(shí)使用并不完全清楚.事實(shí)上,這個(gè)類只是試圖通過選擇一個(gè)隨機(jī)的活動(dòng)來最小化 SocketHolder
的并發(fā)使用(盡管不需要打亂整個(gè)數(shù)組來選擇一個(gè)隨機(jī)索引).它實(shí)際上并沒有阻止并發(fā)使用.
However, it's not entirely clear if a SocketHolder
can be used by multiple threads simultaneously. As it is, this class just tries to minimize concurrent use of SocketHolder
s by picking a random live one (no need to shuffle the entire array to pick one random index though). It does nothing to actually prevent concurrent use.
可以提高效率嗎?
我相信它可以.查看 updateLiveSockets()
方法時(shí),它似乎構(gòu)建了完全相同的映射,除了 SocketHolder
可能具有不同的 isLive
標(biāo)志.這使我得出結(jié)論,與其切換整個(gè)地圖,我只想切換地圖中的每個(gè)列表.為了以線程安全的方式更改映射中的條目,我可以使用 ConcurrentHashMap
.
I believe it can. When looking at the updateLiveSockets()
method, it seems it builds the exact same map, except that the SocketHolder
s may have different values for the isLive
flag. This leads me to conclude that, rather than switching the entire map, i just want to switch each of the lists in the map. And for changing entries in a map in a thread safe manner, I can just use ConcurrentHashMap
.
如果我使用 ConcurrentHashMap
,并且不切換映射,而是切換映射中的值,我可以擺脫 AtomicReference
.
If I use a ConcurrentHashMap
, and don't switch the map, but rather, the values in the map, I can get rid of the AtomicReference
.
要更改映射,我可以構(gòu)建新列表并將其直接放入地圖中.這樣更高效,因?yàn)槲野l(fā)布數(shù)據(jù)更快,創(chuàng)建的對(duì)象更少,而我的同步只是建立在現(xiàn)成的組件上,這有利于可讀性.
To change the mapping I can just build the new list and put it straight into the map. This is more efficient, as I publish data sooner, and I create fewer objects, while my synchronization just builds on ready made components, which benefits readability.
這是我的構(gòu)建(為了簡(jiǎn)潔,省略了一些不太相關(guān)的部分)
Here's my build (omitted some parts that were less relevant, for brevity)
public class SocketManager {
private static final Random random = new Random();
private final ScheduledExecutorService scheduler = Executors.newSingleThreadScheduledExecutor();
private final Map<Datacenters, List<SocketHolder>> liveSocketsByDatacenter = new ConcurrentHashMap<>(); // use ConcurrentHashMap
private final ZContext ctx = new ZContext();
// ...
private SocketManager() {
connectToZMQSockets();
scheduler.scheduleAtFixedRate(this::updateLiveSockets, 30, 30, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
}
// during startup, making a connection and populate once
private void connectToZMQSockets() {
Map<Datacenters, List<String>> socketsByDatacenter = Utils.SERVERS;
for (Map.Entry<Datacenters, List<String>> entry : socketsByDatacenter.entrySet()) {
List<SocketHolder> addedColoSockets = connect(entry.getValue(), ZMQ.PUSH);
liveSocketsByDatacenter.put(entry.getKey(), addedColoSockets); // we can put it straight into the map
}
}
// ...
// this method will be called by multiple threads to get the next live socket
// is there any concurrency or thread safety issue or race condition here?
public Optional<SocketHolder> getNextSocket() {
for (Datacenters dc : Datacenters.getOrderedDatacenters()) {
Optional<SocketHolder> liveSocket = getLiveSocket(liveSocketsByDatacenter.get(dc)); // no more need for a local copy, ConcurrentHashMap, makes sure I get the latest mapped List<SocketHolder>
if (liveSocket.isPresent()) {
return liveSocket;
}
}
return Optional.absent();
}
// is there any concurrency or thread safety issue or race condition here?
private Optional<SocketHolder> getLiveSocket(final List<SocketHolder> listOfEndPoints) {
if (!CollectionUtils.isEmpty(listOfEndPoints)) {
// The list of live sockets
List<SocketHolder> liveOnly = new ArrayList<>(listOfEndPoints.size());
for (SocketHolder obj : listOfEndPoints) {
if (obj.isLive()) {
liveOnly.add(obj);
}
}
if (!liveOnly.isEmpty()) {
// The list is not empty so we shuffle it an return the first element
return Optional.of(liveOnly.get(random.nextInt(liveOnly.size()))); // just pick one
}
}
return Optional.absent();
}
// no need to make this synchronized
private void updateLiveSockets() {
Map<Datacenters, List<String>> socketsByDatacenter = Utils.SERVERS;
for (Map.Entry<Datacenters, List<String>> entry : socketsByDatacenter.entrySet()) {
List<SocketHolder> liveSockets = liveSocketsByDatacenter.get(entry.getKey());
List<SocketHolder> liveUpdatedSockets = new ArrayList<>();
for (SocketHolder liveSocket : liveSockets) { // LINE A
Socket socket = liveSocket.getSocket();
String endpoint = liveSocket.getEndpoint();
Map<byte[], byte[]> holder = populateMap();
Message message = new Message(holder, Partition.COMMAND);
boolean status = SendToSocket.getInstance().execute(message.getAdd(), holder, socket);
boolean isLive = (status) ? true : false;
SocketHolder zmq = new SocketHolder(socket, liveSocket.getContext(), endpoint, isLive);
liveUpdatedSockets.add(zmq);
}
liveSocketsByDatacenter.put(entry.getKey(), Collections.unmodifiableList(liveUpdatedSockets)); // just put it straigth into the map, the mapping will be updated in a thread safe manner.
}
}
}
這篇關(guān)于在單個(gè)后臺(tái)線程定期修改它的同時(shí)讀取 Map的文章就介紹到這了,希望我們推薦的答案對(duì)大家有所幫助,也希望大家多多支持html5模板網(wǎng)!