Develop Reference

Java - suspend thread until other thread event

I have an object A on which I'm updating some data every second and other objects B and C which want to use the data only once per update.
Every object work in parallel.
How can I make B and C wait for the update in A ?
I've seen some similar questions but their responses didn't help me.
I've seen that I could use a "synchronized" bloc on an object D, but they just put the bloc without telling how to instanciate or share that object.
The following code is what I use for my tests. I managed to get them working in parallel but I'm stuck with the suspending part.
This is the class for A
public class Master{
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
Worker B = new Worker("B");
B.start();
Worker C = new Worker("C");
C.start();
while(true)
{
Thread.sleep(1000);
// update data
// notify every thread waiting that they can resume
}
}
}
This is the class used for B and C
public class Worker extends Thread
{
Worker(String name)
{
super("Worker " + name);
}
public void run()
{
int i = 0;
while(!this.isInterrupted())
{
// wait for A to update data
System.out.println(i);
i++;
}
System.out.println("thread interrupted");
}
}
From there, what do I need to add for the purpose I'm looking for ?

To do it very low level, only using the lang APIs, you should use wait/notifyAll.
Not that I used Main.class as an arbitrary object to synchronize
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
SharedData sharedData = new SharedData();
Worker w1 = new Worker("Worker 1", sharedData);
Worker w2 = new Worker("Worker 2", sharedData);
w1.start();
w2.start();
while (true) {
try {
Thread.sleep(1000);
sharedData.increase();;
System.out.println("Master: " + sharedData.value());
synchronized (Main.class) {
Main.class.notifyAll();
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
class SharedData {
private int data = 0;
public void increase () {
data++;
}
public int value() {
return data;
}
}
class Worker extends Thread {
private String workerName;
private SharedData sharedData;
public Worker(String workerName, SharedData sharedData) {
super();
this.workerName = workerName;
this.sharedData = sharedData;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
try {
synchronized (Main.class) {
Main.class.wait();
}
System.out.println(workerName + ": " + sharedData.value());
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}

Not sure if I understand you correctly, but this might be worth checking out for you:
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/CountDownLatch.html

Why use threads at all? Why not just do this?
public class Master {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Worker B = new Worker("B");
Worker C = new Worker("C");
while(true) {
Thread.sleep(1000);
updateData();
B.doWork();
C.doWork();
}
}
}
public class Worker
{
public void doWork() {
System.out.println(i);
i++;
}
private int i = 0;
}

java wait and notify

I'm taking one Integer variable and sharing with two threads. One thread should print even numbers and one thread should print odd number sequentially.
But notify() throwing IllegalMonitorStateException.
package mywaitnotifytest;
public class App {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Integer i=0;
Even even = new Even(i);
even.setName("EvenThread");
Odd odd = new Odd(i);
odd.setName("OddThread");
even.start();
odd.start();
}
}
class Even extends Thread{
Integer var;
Even(Integer var){
this.var=var;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while(true){
synchronized (var) {
if(var%2==0){
try {
var.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
var++;
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName()+" "+var);
var.notify();
}
}
}
}
class Odd extends Thread{
Integer var;
Odd(Integer var){
this.var=var;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while(true){
synchronized (var) {
if(var%2!=0){
try {
var.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
var++;
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName()+" "+var);
var.notify();
}
}
}
}
And the output is :
OddThread 1
Exception in thread "OddThread" java.lang.IllegalMonitorStateException
at java.lang.Object.notify(Native Method)
at mywaitnotifytest.Odd.run(App.java:67)

I think this is sufficiently different to the usual answer to give another one.
In this case you are using synchronized. When you apply a lock it is on a object not a reference.
synchronized (var) {
This locks the object var references, not on var as a field.
var++;
This replaces the object var points to. It is the same as
var = Integer.valueOf(var.intValue() + 1);
Note: Integer and indeed all the primitive wrappers are Immutable. When you perform any operation on them you are actually unboxing, calculating using the primitive value and re-boxing the object. It is possible to get the same object back if it is pooled. e.g.
Integer i = 10;
i += 0; // gives back the same object.
However, if the object is not pooled
Double d = 10;
d += 0; // creates a new object.
var.notify();
Attempts the call notify on the new object, not the one which was locked.
You shouldn't attempt to lock a field which you mutate. It won't do what it appears to do. You also shouldn't lock on a pooled object. In this case you could have another thread using the same Integer for an unrelated purpose and notify() will wake up an unrelated thread.
To use wait/notify correctly, you should
notify() or notifyAll() after a state change in another shared field.
you should use a while loop for wait() to check the state change.
If you don't do this
notify can be lost if another thread is not waiting.
wait can wake spuriously, even when no notify was called.
For the above requirement what is the edit suggested in the code? How do i share the same object for multiple threads?
public class PingPong implements Runnable {
static class Shared { int num; }
private final Shared var;
private final int bit;
public static void main(String[] args) {
Shared var = new Shared();
new Thread(new PingPong(var, 0), "EvenThread").start();
new Thread(new PingPong(var, 1), "OddThread").start();
}
PingPong(Shared var, int bit) {
this.var = var;
this.bit = bit;
}
#Override
public void run() {
try {
String name = Thread.currentThread().getName();
while (true) {
synchronized (var) {
while (var.num % 2 == bit)
var.wait();
var.num++;
System.out.println(name + " " + var.num);
var.notify();
}
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
System.out.println("Interrupted");
}
}
}

Instead of using Integer wrapper class,I created my own class and now It works fine.
package mywaitnotifytest;
public class App {
public static void main(String[] args) {
MyInt i = new MyInt(0);
Even even = new Even(i);
even.setName("EvenThread");
Odd odd = new Odd(i);
odd.setName("OddThread");
even.start();
odd.start();
}
}
class Even extends Thread {
MyInt var;
Even(MyInt var) {
this.var = var;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
try {
Thread.sleep(200);
} catch (InterruptedException e1) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e1.printStackTrace();
}
synchronized (var) {
if (var.i % 2 == 0) {
try {
var.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
var.i++;
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " " + var.i);
var.notify();
}
}
}
}
class Odd extends Thread {
MyInt var;
Odd(MyInt var) {
this.var = var;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
try {
Thread.sleep(2000);
} catch (InterruptedException e1) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e1.printStackTrace();
}
synchronized (var) {
if (var.i % 2 != 0) {
try {
var.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
var.i++;
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " " + var.i);
var.notify();
}
}
}
}
class MyInt {
int i = 0;
public MyInt(int i) {
super();
this.i = i;
}
#Override
public String toString() {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
return "" + i;
}
}

IllegalMonitorStateException on notifyAll [duplicate]

I'm new to using wait() and notify() in Java and I'm getting an IllegalMonitorStateException.
Main Code
public class ThreadTest {
private static Integer state = 0;
public static void main(String[] args) {
synchronized(state) {
System.out.println("Starting thread");
Thread t = new Thread(new AnotherTest());
t.start();
synchronized(state) {
state = 0;
while(state == 0) {
try {
state.wait(1000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
System.out.println("State is: " + state);
}
}
}
public static class AnotherTest implements Runnable {
#Override
public void run() {
synchronized(state) {
state = 1;
state.notify();
}
}
}
}
I'm getting an IllegalMonitorStateException what state.notify() is called. Any ideas?
Edit: Based on answer below here is code that works. As a side note, I was first trying this with an enum which has the same problem of using Integer.
public class ThreadTest {
private static int state = 0;
private static Object monitor = new Object();
public static void main(String[] args) {
synchronized(monitor) {
System.out.println("Starting thread");
Thread t = new Thread(new AnotherTest());
t.start();
state = 0;
while(state == 0) {
try {
for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
System.out.println("Waiting " + (5 - i) + " Seconds");
Thread.sleep(1000);
}
monitor.wait(1000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
System.out.println("State is: " + state);
}
}
public static class AnotherTest implements Runnable {
#Override
public void run() {
synchronized(monitor) {
state = 1;
monitor.notify();
}
}
}
}

This
private static Integer state = 0;
is equivalent to
private static Integer state = Integer.valueOf(0);
The invocation of valueOf(0) returns a reference to an Integer object, call it A.
You then do
synchronized(state) {
your thread acquires the lock on the object referenced by state, currently that is A.
You then do
state = 1;
which is equivalent to
state = Integer.valueOf(1);
which gives you a different reference to an Integer object, call it B, and assigns it to state. When you then call
state.notify();
you're invoking notify() on an object, B, for which your thread doesn't own the monitor. You can't call notify or wait on objects for which your thread doesn't own the monitor.

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();
}
}
}
}
}

release lock from object in java

hello guys this is my code , problem am facing is that despite calling notifyAll, it is not releasing the lock , can you please state the reason and tell the solution. Am new to threads. Thanks in advance.
class Lock1 {}
class Home1 implements Runnable {
private static int i = 0;
private Lock1 object;
private Thread th;
public Home1(Lock1 ob, String t) {
object = ob;
th = new Thread(this);
th.start();
}
public void run() {
synchronized (object) {
while (i != 10) {
++i;
System.out.println(i);
}
try {
// System.out.println("here");
object.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
System.out.println("here thread 1");
}
}
}
class Home2 implements Runnable {
private static int i = 0;
private Lock1 object;
Thread th;
public Home2(Lock1 ob, String t) {
object = ob;
th = new Thread(this);
th.start();
}
public void run() {
synchronized (object) {
while (i != 10) {
++i;
System.out.println(i);
}
try {
// System.out.println("here");
object.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
System.out.println("here thread 2");
}
}
}
public class Locking {
public static void main(String arg[]) {
Lock1 ob = new Lock1();
new Home1(ob, "thread 1");
new Home2(ob, "thread 2");
synchronized (ob) {
ob.notifyAll();
}
}
}

When you use notifyAll, you should also have a state changed and when you use wait, you should check that state change.
In your case it is likely that notifyAll will be called long before the threads really have time to start. (For a computer, starting a thread takes an eternity, like 10,000,000 clock cycles) This means the notifyAll is lost. (It only notifies threads which are actually waiting right at that moment)