jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vladimir Sitnikov <>
Subject Re: Why do Functions that only have values as instance variable synchronize execute ?
Date Thu, 16 Oct 2014 18:00:07 GMT
>I'm not sure I agree with that; the value of the mutable field needs
>to be published safely as well.

Do I read it properly? "you are not sure if java.lang.String is safe"
It is safe since java 1.5.
This is ensured by "17.5 final fields semantics" was added to JMM.

> But Globals.state is not final or volatile.

Here's "safe publication" via data race (Globals.state is not
Thread 1:
  class Globals { public static String state; }
  Globals.state = new String(new char[]{'h','e','l','l','o'}); // no
volatile fields involved

Thread 2:
  System.out.println(Globals.state); // this _must_ print either null or

Note how thread 2 must not print h/he/hel/hell/, even though thread 1
copies characters from one array to another one.

>How does that illustrate what you wrote here: "Just synchronization on the
same lock is not sufficient"

Ok, here's example with synchronizations:

Thread 1:
Globals.str = new StringFromFile();
str.setParameters(...) // this is method is synchronized

Thread 2:
Globals.str.execute() // this method is synchronized

There is no guarantee that execute will observe proper state of
For instance, str.execute might be executed before setParameters, then
"setParameters would not happens-before execute", thus there would be no
"safe publication from setParameters to execute".

> True, but that would also affect single threaded code.

The original question was to avoid contention between multiple threads. I
do not think we need spend time on discussing single-threaded executions.
Once again my main point: I am not sure if volatile/synchronized is
required. I would like to dodge non-required synchronization.


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message