Develop Reference

How is unlock happening after await

I wrote a small program to print odd-even numbers alternatively but have a question:
Since thread should wait at await call so how is reentrant lock is getting unlocked?
public class Worker implements Runnable
{
private ReentrantLock rLock = null;
private Condition condition = null;
private String name;
volatile static boolean isEvenTurn = true;
public Worker(String name, ReentrantLock rLock, Condition condition)
{
this.name = name;
this.rLock = rLock;
this.condition = condition;
}
#Override
public void run()
{
try
{
if(name.equals("ODD"))
printOdd();
else
printEven();
}
catch(Exception e) { e.printStackTrace();}
}
private void printOdd() throws Exception
{
while(isEvenTurn);
for(int i=1;i<10;i+=2)
{
try
{
rLock.lock();
System.out.println(i);
}
catch(Exception e) {e.printStackTrace();}
finally
{
condition.signal();
condition.await();
rLock.unlock();
}
}
}
private void printEven() throws Exception
{
for(int i=0;i<10;i+=2)
{
try
{
rLock.lock();
System.out.println(i);
isEvenTurn = false;
}
catch(Exception e) {e.printStackTrace();}
finally
{
condition.signal();
condition.await();
rLock.unlock();
}
}
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
ReentrantLock rLock = new ReentrantLock();
ExecutorService service = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
Condition c = rLock.newCondition();
Worker oddPrinter = new Worker("ODD",rLock,c);
Worker evenPrinter = new Worker("EVEN",rLock,c);
service.execute(evenPrinter);
service.execute(oddPrinter);
service.shutdown();
}
}

In printEven() method add this line: in finally block:
finally
{
condition.signal();
if(i < 10)condition.await();
rLock.unlock();
}
By adding this condition, when your
i = 10 your thread will not wait anymore.

Producer-consumer problem - both end up waiting

new to multithreading. I wrote this program which should be a solution to the producer-consumer problem. The problem is that both a producer and a consumer end up in the waiting state. What seems to be wrong? (And everything else what is wrong ^_^) Thanks in advance.
Main class:
package producer.consumer2;
import java.util.Scanner;
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Buffer<Integer> bf = new Buffer<>(10);
Producer prod = new Producer(bf);
Consumer cons = new Consumer(bf);
prod.setConsumer(cons);
cons.setProducer(prod);
new Thread(prod).start();
new Thread(cons).start();
if(quitInput()) {
prod.terminate();
cons.terminate();
}
}
private static boolean quitInput() {
Scanner sc = new Scanner(System.in);
String line = sc.nextLine();
do {
if(line.toLowerCase().equals("q") || line.toLowerCase().equals("quit")) {
sc.close();
return true;
}
line = sc.nextLine();
} while(true);
}
}
Buffer class:
package producer.consumer2;
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class Buffer<E> {
private final int MAX_LENGTH;
private ArrayList<E> values;
public Buffer(int length){
MAX_LENGTH = length;
values = new ArrayList<E>(length);
}
public synchronized void add(E e) {
if(values.size() < MAX_LENGTH) {
values.add(e);
System.out.println(values);
} else {
throw new RuntimeException("Buffer is full at the moment.");
}
}
public synchronized boolean isEmpty() {
return values.size() == 0;
}
public synchronized boolean isFull() {
return values.size() >= MAX_LENGTH ? true : false;
}
public synchronized E remove(int index) {
E val = values.remove(index);
System.out.println(values);
return val;
}
}
Consumer class:
package producer.consumer2;
public class Consumer implements Runnable {
private final Buffer<Integer> bf;
private volatile boolean running = true;
private Producer prod;
public Consumer(Buffer<Integer> bf) {
this.bf = bf;
}
public void setProducer(Producer prod) {
this.prod = prod;
}
#Override
public void run() {
int sum = 0;
int counter = 0;
while (running) {
if (bf.isEmpty()) {
if (prod != null) {
synchronized (prod) {
prod.notify();
}
}
myWait(0);
} else {
sum += bf.remove(0);
counter++;
}
}
System.out.println("for first " + counter + " nums an avg = " + ((double) sum / counter));
}
private void myWait(long millisecs) {
System.out.println("consumer is waiting.");
try {
synchronized (this) {
this.wait(millisecs);
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
System.out.println("consumer is NOT waiting.");
}
public void terminate() {
this.running = false;
}
}
Producer class:
package producer.consumer2;
public class Producer implements Runnable {
private final Buffer<Integer> bf;
private volatile boolean running = true;
private Consumer cons;
public Producer(Buffer<Integer> bf) {
this.bf = bf;
}
public void setConsumer(Consumer cons) {
this.cons = cons;
}
#Override
public void run() {
int counter = 1;
while (running) {
if (bf.isFull()) {
if (cons != null) {
synchronized (cons) {
cons.notify();
}
}
myWait(0);
} else {
bf.add(counter);
counter++;
}
}
}
private void myWait(long millisecs) {
System.out.println("producer is waiting.");
try {
synchronized (this) {
this.wait(millisecs);
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
System.out.println("producer is NOT waiting.");
}
public void terminate() {
this.running = false;
}
}

Looks like a regular case of 'missed signal'. Since both consumer and producer just wait without checking a condition, yu have no way to ensure the notify actually happens during the waiting.
e.g. in Consumer :
if (prod != null) {
synchronized (prod) {
prod.notify();
}
}
myWait(0);
Note that if, after prod.notify() the Production thread does all of its work, and notifies the consumer, before it even starts waiting, the consumer will start waiting for a signal that's already been given, and missed.
Always take into account that waiting may not be needed anymore. So always check a condition before even starting to wait. In your case here, the consumer should not even begin waiting if the buffer is full. And likewise the producer should not start waiting if the buffer is empty.
It's also possible to get spurious wake ups. So you'll have to re-check the condition when returning from waiting. The typical idiom is this :
synchronized(monitor) {
while (!stateBasedCondition) {
monitor.wait();
}
}

Multi threaded java program to print even and odd numbers alternatively

I was asked to write a two-threaded Java program in an interview. In this program one thread should print even numbers and the other thread should print odd numbers alternatively.
Sample output:
Thread1: 1
Thread2: 2
Thread1: 3
Thread2: 4
... and so on
I wrote the following program. One class Task which contains two methods to print even and odd numbers respectively. From main method, I created two threads to call these two methods. The interviewer asked me to improve it further, but I could not think of any improvement. Is there any better way to write the same program?
class Task
{
boolean flag;
public Task(boolean flag)
{
this.flag = flag;
}
public void printEven()
{
for( int i = 2; i <= 10; i+=2 )
{
synchronized (this)
{
try
{
while( !flag )
wait();
System.out.println(i);
flag = false;
notify();
}
catch (InterruptedException ex)
{
ex.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
public void printOdd()
{
for( int i = 1; i < 10; i+=2 )
{
synchronized (this)
{
try
{
while(flag )
wait();
System.out.println(i);
flag = true;
notify();
}
catch(InterruptedException ex)
{
ex.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
}
public class App {
public static void main(String [] args)
{
Task t = new Task(false);
Thread t1 = new Thread( new Runnable() {
public void run()
{
t.printOdd();
}
});
Thread t2 = new Thread( new Runnable() {
public void run()
{
t.printEven();
}
});
t1.start();
t2.start();
}
}

I think this should work properly and pretty simple.
package com.simple;
import java.util.concurrent.Semaphore;
/**
* #author Evgeny Zhuravlev
*/
public class ConcurrentPing
{
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException
{
Semaphore semaphore1 = new Semaphore(0, true);
Semaphore semaphore2 = new Semaphore(0, true);
new Thread(new Task("1", 1, semaphore1, semaphore2)).start();
new Thread(new Task("2", 2, semaphore2, semaphore1)).start();
semaphore1.release();
}
private static class Task implements Runnable
{
private String name;
private long value;
private Semaphore semaphore1;
private Semaphore semaphore2;
public Task(String name, long value, Semaphore semaphore1, Semaphore semaphore2)
{
this.name = name;
this.value = value;
this.semaphore1 = semaphore1;
this.semaphore2 = semaphore2;
}
#Override
public void run()
{
while (true)
{
try
{
semaphore1.acquire();
System.out.println(name + ": " + value);
value += 2;
semaphore2.release();
}
catch (InterruptedException e)
{
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
}
}
}

Well, there are many alternatives. I would probably use a SynchronousQueue instead (I don't like low-level wait/notify and try to use higher-level concurrency primitives instead). Also printOdd and printEven could be merged into single method and no additional flags are necessary:
public class App {
static class OddEven implements Runnable {
private final SynchronousQueue<Integer> queue = new SynchronousQueue<>();
public void start() throws InterruptedException {
Thread oddThread = new Thread(this);
Thread evenThread = new Thread(this);
oddThread.start();
queue.put(1);
evenThread.start();
}
#Override
public void run() {
try {
while (true) {
int i = queue.take();
System.out.println(i + " (" + Thread.currentThread() + ")");
if (i == 10)
break;
queue.put(++i);
if (i == 10)
break;
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
new OddEven().start();
}
}

Is there any better way to write the same program?
Well, the thing is, the only good way to write the program is to use a single thread. If you want a program to do X, Y, and Z in that order, then write a procedure that does X, then Y, then Z. There is no better way than that.
Here's what I would have written after discussing the appropriateness of threads with the interviewer.
import java.util.concurrent.SynchronousQueue;
import java.util.function.Consumer;
public class EvenOdd {
public static void main(String[] args) {
SynchronousQueue<Object> q1 = new SynchronousQueue<>();
SynchronousQueue<Object> q2 = new SynchronousQueue<>();
Consumer<Integer> consumer = (Integer count) -> System.out.println(count);
new Thread(new Counter(q1, q2, 2, 1, consumer)).start();
new Thread(new Counter(q2, q1, 2, 2, consumer)).start();
try {
q1.put(new Object());
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
throw new RuntimeException(ex);
}
}
private static class Counter implements Runnable {
final SynchronousQueue<Object> qin;
final SynchronousQueue<Object> qout;
final int increment;
final Consumer<Integer> consumer;
int count;
Counter(SynchronousQueue<Object> qin, SynchronousQueue<Object> qout,
int increment, int initial_count,
Consumer<Integer> consumer) {
this.qin = qin;
this.qout = qout;
this.increment = increment;
this.count = initial_count;
this.consumer = consumer;
}
public void run() {
try {
while (true) {
Object token = qin.take();
consumer.accept(count);
qout.put(token);
count += increment;
}
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
throw new RuntimeException(ex);
}
}
}
}

How about a shorter version like this:
public class OddEven implements Runnable {
private static volatile int n = 1;
public static void main(String [] args) {
new Thread(new OddEven()).start();
new Thread(new OddEven()).start();
}
#Override
public void run() {
synchronized (this.getClass()) {
try {
while (n < 10) {
this.getClass().notify();
this.getClass().wait();
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + ": " + (n++));
this.getClass().notify();
}
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
ex.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
There is a bit of a trick to kick-start the threads properly - thus the need to an extra notify() to start the whole thing (instead of have both processes wait, or required the main Thread to call a notify) and also to handle the possibility that a thread starts, does it's work and calls notify before the second thread has started :)

My initial answer was non-functional. Edited:
package test;
public final class App {
private static volatile int counter = 1;
private static final Object lock = new Object();
public static void main(String... args) {
for (int t = 0; t < 2; ++t) {
final int oddOrEven = t;
new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override public void run() {
while (counter < 100) {
synchronized (lock) {
if (counter % 2 == oddOrEven) {
System.out.println(counter++);
}
}
}
}
}).start();
}
}
}

Java : synchronizing on custom collection class

I want to have shared collection class which is filled by producer thread and output is shown by consumer thread. It's sometimes working with 0 element of the collection class but never goes further. In Eclipse I observer "DestroyJVM" thread after application freezes.
There is artificial latency on the producer to simulate "slow" producer. I don't have an idea why application is not working in sequence, like
"Producer acquires lock on collection class, adds Integer, consumer waits, producer releases lock, consumer acquires lock, consumer prints, consumer releases lock, producer acquires..." and so on.
Can anyone point out where is the mistake?
Here is my code:
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
import static java.lang.System.out;
public class SyncOwnCollMain {
public static void main(String[] args) {
SharedIntegers ints = new SharedIntegers();
Producer producer = new Producer();
Consumer consumer = new Consumer();
producer.setInts(ints);
consumer.setInts(ints);
Thread producerThread = new Thread(producer);
producerThread.setName("ProducerThread");
Thread consumerThread = new Thread(consumer);
consumerThread.setName("ConsumerThread");
producerThread.start();
consumerThread.start();
}
}
class SharedIntegers {
private final List<Integer> ints = new ArrayList<Integer>();
private final int max = 100;
public synchronized void addAtPosition(int i, Integer integer) {
ints.add(i, integer);
}
public synchronized Integer getAtPosition(int i) {
return ints.get(i);
}
public synchronized Integer removeAtPosition(int i) {
return ints.remove(i);
}
public synchronized Integer getSize() {
return ints.size();
}
public synchronized boolean isFinished() {
return max < ints.size();
}
}
class Producer implements Runnable {
private SharedIntegers ints;
private int timeout = 100;
public SharedIntegers getInts() {
return ints;
}
public void setInts(SharedIntegers ints) {
this.ints = ints;
}
#Override
public void run() {
out.println("Started ProducerThread");
if (getInts() != null) {
int i = 0;
Integer integer = null;
while (!getInts().isFinished()) {
synchronized (getInts()) {
integer = i * 3;
getInts().addAtPosition(i, integer);
out.print("Producer added new integer = " + integer + " at " + i + " position");
out.println(". Will sleep now for " + timeout + " ms");
try {
Thread.sleep(timeout);
getInts().wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
i++;
}
}
}
}
}
class Consumer implements Runnable {
private SharedIntegers ints;
public SharedIntegers getInts() {
return ints;
}
public void setInts(SharedIntegers ints) {
this.ints = ints;
}
#Override
public void run() {
out.println("Started ConsumerThread");
if (getInts() != null && getInts().getSize() > 0) {
int i = 0;
while (!getInts().isFinished()) {
synchronized (getInts()) {
showAtPosition(i, getInts());
i++;
try {
getInts().wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
Thread.yield();
}
}
} else {
Thread.yield();
}
}
private void showAtPosition(int position, SharedIntegers ints) {
out.println("sharedInts[" + position + "] -> " + ints.getAtPosition(position));
}
}
EDITED: I managed to rewrite code so that it will work in the desired manner, however, producerThread and consumerThread don't exit gracefully. Any ideas why?
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
import static java.lang.System.out;
public class SyncOwnCollMain {
public static void main(String[] args) {
out.println("Main application started");
SharedIntegers ints = new SharedIntegers();
Producer producer = new Producer();
Consumer consumer = new Consumer();
producer.setInts(ints);
consumer.setInts(ints);
Thread producerThread = new Thread(producer);
producerThread.setName("ProducerThread");
Thread consumerThread = new Thread(consumer);
consumerThread.setName("ConsumerThread");
consumerThread.start();
try {
Thread.sleep(1000); // simulate that consumerThread is "anxious" to start
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
producerThread.start();
try {
consumerThread.join(); //let consumerThread finish before main()
producerThread.join(); //let producerThread finish before main()
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
out.println("Main application finished");
}
}
class SharedIntegers {
private final List<Integer> ints = new ArrayList<Integer>();
private final int max = 5;
public synchronized void addAtPosition(int i, Integer integer) {
ints.add(i, integer);
}
public synchronized Integer getAtPosition(int i) {
return ints.get(i);
}
public synchronized Integer removeAtPosition(int i) {
return ints.remove(i);
}
public synchronized Integer getSize() {
return ints.size();
}
public synchronized boolean isFinished() {
return max <= ints.size();
}
public synchronized boolean overflow(int i) {
return i >= max;
}
}
class Producer implements Runnable {
private SharedIntegers ints;
private final int timeout = 500;
public SharedIntegers getInts() {
return ints;
}
public void setInts(SharedIntegers ints) {
this.ints = ints;
}
#Override
public void run() {
out.println("Started ProducerThread");
if (getInts() != null) {
int i = 0;
Integer integer = null;
synchronized (getInts()) {
while (!getInts().isFinished()) {
integer = i * 3;
getInts().addAtPosition(i, integer);
out.print("Producer added new integer = " + integer + " at " + i + " position");
out.println(". Will sleep now for " + timeout + " ms");
try {
getInts().notify();
getInts().wait();
Thread.sleep(timeout); // simulate "slow" producer
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
i++;
}
try {
getInts().wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
out.println("Finished ProducerThread");
}
}
class Consumer implements Runnable {
private SharedIntegers ints;
public SharedIntegers getInts() {
return ints;
}
public void setInts(SharedIntegers ints) {
this.ints = ints;
}
#Override
public void run() {
out.println("Started ConsumerThread");
if (getInts() != null) {
synchronized (getInts()) {
int i = 0;
while (!getInts().overflow(i)) {
if (getInts().getSize() > 0) {
showAtPosition(i, getInts());
i++;
}
try {
getInts().notify();
getInts().wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
out.println("Finished ConsumerThread");
}
private void showAtPosition(int position, SharedIntegers ints) {
out.println("sharedInts[" + position + "] -> " + ints.getAtPosition(position));
}
}
EDIT 2: solution found : needed to notify consumerThread from producerThread that getInts() lock can be re-acquired. The working code with my comments looks like this (added some data modification by consumerThread):
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
import static java.lang.System.out;
public class SyncOwnCollMain {
public static void main(String[] args) {
out.println("Main application started");
SharedIntegers ints = new SharedIntegers();
Producer producer = new Producer();
Consumer consumer = new Consumer();
producer.setInts(ints);
consumer.setInts(ints);
Thread producerThread = new Thread(producer);
producerThread.setName("ProducerThread");
Thread consumerThread = new Thread(consumer);
consumerThread.setName("ConsumerThread");
consumerThread.start();
try {
Thread.sleep(1000); // simulate that consumerThread is "anxious" to start
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
producerThread.start();
try {
consumerThread.join(); //let consumerThread finish before main()
producerThread.join(); //let producerThread finish before main()
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
out.println("Main application finished"); // here, main() thread has result produced by producerThread and consumerThread
}
}
class SharedIntegers {
private final List<Integer> ints = new ArrayList<Integer>();
private final int max = 5;
public synchronized void addAtPosition(int i, Integer integer) {
ints.add(i, integer);
}
public synchronized Integer getAtPosition(int i) {
return ints.get(i);
}
public synchronized Integer removeAtPosition(int i) {
return ints.remove(i);
}
public synchronized Integer getSize() {
return ints.size();
}
public synchronized boolean isFinished() {
return max <= ints.size();
}
public synchronized boolean overflow(int i) {
return i >= max;
}
}
class Producer implements Runnable {
private SharedIntegers ints;
private final int timeout = 500;
public SharedIntegers getInts() {
return ints;
}
public void setInts(SharedIntegers ints) {
this.ints = ints;
}
#Override
public void run() {
out.println("Started ProducerThread");
if (getInts() != null) {
int i = 0;
Integer integer = null;
synchronized (getInts()) {
while (!getInts().isFinished()) {
integer = i * 3;
getInts().addAtPosition(i, integer);
out.print("Producer added new integer = " + integer + " at " + i + " position");
out.println(". Will sleep now for " + timeout + " ms");
try {
getInts().notifyAll(); // notify all threads (in this case - consumer thread) that getInts() will be available for other threads to sync and other threads are legitimate to compete for locking getInts()
getInts().wait(); // release lock for getInts()
Thread.sleep(timeout); // simulate "slow" producer
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
i++;
}
out.println("Finished ProducerThread while() loop");
getInts().notifyAll(); // after job is done, need to notify consumer thread that it can compete to obtain getInts() lock
}
}
}
}
class Consumer implements Runnable {
private SharedIntegers ints;
public SharedIntegers getInts() {
return ints;
}
public void setInts(SharedIntegers ints) {
this.ints = ints;
}
#Override
public void run() {
out.println("Started ConsumerThread");
if (getInts() != null) {
int i = 0;
synchronized (getInts()) {
while (!getInts().overflow(i)) {
if (getInts().getSize() > 0) {
out.println(showAtPosition(i, getInts()));
increaseAtPosition(i, getInts());
out.println("After consumer increase : " + showAtPosition(i, getInts()));
i++;
}
try {
getInts().notifyAll(); // notify all threads that other threads are legitimate to compete for getInts() lock
getInts().wait(); // release getInts() lock, wait for allowance notification
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
out.println("Finished ConsumerThread while() loop");
}
}
}
private String showAtPosition(int position, SharedIntegers ints) {
return "sharedInts[" + position + "] -> " + ints.getAtPosition(position);
}
private void increaseAtPosition(int position, SharedIntegers ints) {
Integer increased = ints.getAtPosition(position)+1;
ints.removeAtPosition(position);
ints.addAtPosition(position, increased);
}
}

Your call to getInts().wait(); causes each Thread to wait forever, since you never call notify() , therefore your application freezes.
See the Javadoc for java.lang.Object.wait() and java.lang.Object.notify()

Inside the Producer, change
getInts().wait()
to
getInts().notify()

How to make sure two threads printing even odd numbers maintain even first then odd order for this implementation?

I have created two runnable jobs: PrintEvenNumbersJob and PrintOddNumbersJob and spawned two threads to execute these jobs. This seems to work perfectly fine! But I smell something suspicious about this implementation. Can I have some comments and advice on this implementation?
The problem that I see with this implementation is that the program terminates only when thread1 gains the lock to the object lock first otherwise it print the odd first even second order and doesn't terminate unless I supply yet another statement "lock.notify" after for statement in PrintEvenNumbersJob (as in this implementation). My question here is how to make sure that thread1 is executed first.
public class PrintEvenNumbersJob implements Runnable {
private Object lock;
public PrintEvenNumbersJob(Object lock) {
this.lock = lock;
}
#Override
public void run() {
synchronized (lock) {
for (int i = 0; i <= 10; i += 2) {
lock.notify();
System.out.println(i);
try {
lock.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
lock.notify(); // not required if thread1 gains lock first
}
}
}
public class PrintOddNumbersJob implements Runnable {
private Object lock;
public PrintOddNumbersJob(Object lock) {
this.lock = lock;
}
#Override
public void run() {
synchronized (lock) {
for (int i = 1; i < 10; i += 2) {
lock.notify();
System.out.println(i);
try {
lock.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
lock.notify();
}
}
}
public class EvenOddManager {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Object lock = new Object();
PrintEvenNumbersJob printEvenNumbersJob = new PrintEvenNumbersJob(lock);
PrintOddNumbersJob printOddNumbersJob = new PrintOddNumbersJob(lock);
Thread thread1 = new Thread(printEvenNumbersJob);
Thread thread2 = new Thread(printOddNumbersJob);
thread2.start();
thread1.start();
}
}

Have you try using Semaphores? It's easier because you don't need to worry about the order that wait and notify are called (if you call notify before the wait, it's "lost")
Sample code:
import java.util.concurrent.*;
public class Test {
private final Semaphore oddJobPermits = new Semaphore(0);
private final Semaphore evenJobPermits = new Semaphore(1);
private class EvenJob implements Runnable {
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
try {
evenJobPermits.acquire();
System.out.println(i * 2);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
} finally {
oddJobPermits.release();
}
}
}
}
private class OddJob implements Runnable {
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
try {
oddJobPermits.acquire();
System.out.println(i * 2 + 1);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
} finally {
evenJobPermits.release();
}
}
}
}
public void run() {
new Thread(new EvenJob()).start();
new Thread(new OddJob()).start();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
new Test().run();
}
}

I believe you will need a referee:
public class Referee {
private boolean evensTurn = true;
public void waitMyTurn(boolean even) {
synchronized(this) {
while (even != evensTurn) {
try {
wait();
} finally {
}
}
}
}
public void done() {
synchronized(this) {
evensTurn = !evensTurn;
notify();
}
}
}
public class PrintEvenNumbersJob implements Runnable {
private Referee referee;
public PrintEvenNumbersJob(Referee referee) {
this.referee = referee;
}
#Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i <= 10; i += 2) {
referee.waitMyTurn(true);
System.out.println(i);
referee.done();
}
}
}
public class PrintOddNumbersJob implements Runnable {
private Referee referee;
public PrintOddNumbersJob(Referee referee) {
this.referee = referee;
}
#Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i <= 10; i += 2) {
referee.waitMyTurn(false);
System.out.println(i);
referee.done();
}
}
}

I tried and tested this code. It works using Semaphore
public class TestSemaphore
{
public static void main(String[] args)
throws Exception
{
AtomicInteger count = new AtomicInteger();
Semaphore s = new Semaphore(1, true);
Semaphore t = new Semaphore(1, true);
OddNumberThread oThread = new OddNumberThread(count, s, t);
EvenNumberThread eThread = new EvenNumberThread(count, s, t);
eThread.start();
oThread.start();
}
static class EvenNumberThread
extends Thread
{
private AtomicInteger count;
private Semaphore s, t;
public EvenNumberThread(AtomicInteger pCount, Semaphore pS, Semaphore pT)
{
super("Even");
count = pCount;
s = pS;
t = pT;
}
#Override
public void run()
{
// Make this thread wait until even thread starts, Order will be incorrect if removed these lines.
s.acquireUninterruptibly();
while (count.intValue() <= 10)
{
try
{
// Double checking to make it work
s.acquireUninterruptibly();
System.out.println(getName() + " " + count.getAndIncrement());
}
finally
{
t.release();
}
}
}
}
static class OddNumberThread
extends Thread
{
private AtomicInteger count;
private Semaphore s, t;
public OddNumberThread(AtomicInteger pCount, Semaphore pS, Semaphore pT)
{
super("Odd");
count = pCount;
s = pS;
t = pT;
}
#Override
public void run()
{
// Start this thread first and start printing, Order will be incorrect if removed these lines.
t.acquireUninterruptibly();
s.release();
while (count.intValue() <= 10)
{
try
{
t.acquireUninterruptibly();
System.out.println(getName() + " " + count.getAndIncrement());
}
finally
{
s.release();
}
}
}
}
}