When I run the example class at http://javarevisited.blogspot.in/2013/03/reentrantlock-example-in-java-synchronized-difference-vs-lock.html, I'm seeing the same behavior as with synchronized.
can anyone explain how to use Reentrant Lock in java over Synchronized with some best examples
7.9k Views Asked by user2473958 AtThere are 3 best solutions below
On
From the JavaDoc of the ReetrantLock class:
A reentrant mutual exclusion
Lockwith the same basic behavior and semantics as the implicit monitor lock accessed usingsynchronizedmethods and statements, but with extended capabilities.
In your example, you do not use the "extended capabilities"; you use the ReentrantLock as an equivalent alternative to the synchronized method (except that with the synchronized statement, you use this as the lock). So the two methods must behave the same.
On
Here are three ways, methods, of a thread accessing a lock and one for letting go of the lock. You might want to try implementing these using the synchronized keyword. The extended capabilities and advantages of using ReentrantLock will become apparent.
public class DoorLockUsingLock {
private int counter= 0;
private Thread owner= null;
private Lock l = new ReentrantLock();
private Condition notLocked= l.newCondition();
public void lockItDown() throws InterruptedException {
l.lockInterruptibly();
try {
while ((counter> 0) && (owner!= Thread.currentThread())) {
notLocked.await();
}
counter++;
owner = Thread.currentThread();
} finally {
l.unlock();
}
}
public void lockItDownUninterruptibly() {
l.lock();
try {
while ((counter > 0) && (owner != Thread.currentThread())) {
notLocked.awaitUninterruptibly();
}
counter++;
owner= Thread.currentThread();
} finally {
l.unlock();
}
}
public boolean tryLockItDown(long timeout, TimeUnit unit) throws InterruptedException {
long time = unit.toNanos(timeout);
long end = System.nanoTime() + time;
boolean success = l.tryLock(timeout, unit);
if (!success) {
return false;
}
try {
time = end- System.nanoTime();
while ((counter> 0) && (owner != Thread.currentThread()) && (time > 0)) {
notLocked.await(time, TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS);
time = end - System.nanoTime();
}
if (time > 0) {
counter++;
owner = Thread.currentThread();
return true;
}
return false;
} finally {
l.unlock();
}
}
public void unlockIt() throws IllegalMonitorStateException {
l.lock();
try {
if (counter== 0) {
throw new IllegalMonitorStateException();
}
if (owner!= Thread.currentThread()) {
throw new IllegalMonitorStateException();
}
counter--;
if (counter == 0) {
owner = null;
notLocked.signal();
}
} finally {
l.unlock();
}
}
}
No, you generally won't see a difference in behavior. But as the website says, there are a couple cases you'll want to use a
ReentrantLockinstead ofsynchronized.If you don't need any of those improvements, using
synchronizedis just fine, and you may not be able to tell the difference.