Hi,
I don't think it's a correct.
in the method
1. public static Singleton getInstance()
2. {
3. if (instance == null)
4. {
5. synchonized(mutex)
6. {
7. instance = new Singleton();
8. }
9. }
10. return instance;
11. }
12. }
Two or more threads may valuate the if statement in line 3 and they may have
all condition to "true"
then all threads stop on line 5 and "only one" make the instance of the Singleton.
But, when the "only one" 's finished and exit from the synchronized lines
another thread make the instance of the Singleton
on so all other threads.
bye Stefano
>-- Messaggio Originale --
>Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 15:40:39 +1000
>Reply-To: An interest list for Sun Java Center J2EE Pattern Catalog <J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST@(protected)>
>From: Chris Harrison <CHarrison@(protected)>
>Subject: Re: Singleton pattern
>To: J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST@(protected)
>
>
>
>This works, but is not optimised. You can optimise the method to do lazy
>instantiation like so:
>
>class Singleton
>{
> private static Singleton instance = null;
> private static Object mutex = new Object();
>
> public Singleton()
> {
> }
>
> public static Singleton getInstance()
> {
> if (instance == null)
> {
> synchonized(mutex)
> {
> instance = new Singleton();
> }
> }
> return instance;
> }
>}
>
>Its also tempting to do double check locking, but thats been proven to not
>work:
>http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-dcl.html
>
>
>ch.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: An interest list for Sun Java Center J2EE Pattern Catalog [ mailto:J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST@(protected)
>Behalf Of Harish
>Sent: Tuesday, 4 October 2005 3:17 PM
>To: J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST@(protected)
>Subject: Re: Singleton pattern
>
>
>Hi,
>The code works fine for multithreaded access to the getInstance() method.
>However, when you analyze it you realize that synchronization is required
>only for the first invocation of the method. Subsequent invocations do not
>require synchronization because the first invocation is the only invocation
>that executes the code at //2,( see below) which is the only line that requires
>synchronization. All other invocations determine that instance is non-null
>and return it. Multiple threads can safely execute concurrently on all invocations
>except the first. However, because the method is synchronized, you pay the
>cost of synchronization for every invocation of the method, even though
it
>is only required on the first invocation.
>Another way is to Forgo synchronization and use a static field.
>class Singleton
>{
>private static Singleton instance = new Singleton();
> private Singleton()
> {
> //...
> }
> public static Singleton getInstance()
> {
> return instance;
> }
>}
>The code in Listing 10 does not use synchronization and ensures that the
>Singleton object is not created until a call is made to the static getInstance()
>method. This is a good alternative if your objective is to eliminate synchronization
>Thanks
>Harish
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "SUBSCRIBE EJB-INTEREST anonymous" <ahtwog@(protected)>
>To: <J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST@(protected)>
>Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 8:06 AM
>Subject: Singleton pattern
>
>
>> Hi,
>> Is the below singleton pattern thread safe.
>> public class Singleton
>> {
>> private static Singleton singleton ;
>> public synchronized static Singleton getInstance() throws
>> {
>> if(singleton ==null)
>> {
>> singleton = new Singleton (); ////// >>> 2
>> }
>>
>> return singleton ;
>> }
>>
>> private Singleton () {
>> //perform member variable initialization here
>> }
>>
>> ====================================================================
>> Companion Site: http://www.corej2eepatterns.com
>> J2EE BluePrints: http://java.sun.com/blueprints/corej2eepatterns
>> List Archive: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/j2eepatterns-interest.html
>> Unsubscribing: email "signoff J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST" to listserv@(protected)
>> ==================================================================== Companion
>Site: http://www.corej2eepatterns.com J2EE BluePrints: http://java.sun.com/blueprints/corej2eepatterns
>List Archive: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/j2eepatterns-interest.html
>Unsubscribing: email "signoff J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST" to listserv@(protected)
>
>
>
>
>The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
>which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
>Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of
any
>action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than
>the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
>contact the sender and permanently delete the material from your computer
>system. We cannot guarantee that this e-mail is virus-free. You should scan
>attachments with the latest virus scan before opening. We will not be liable
>for any loss, cost or damage of any kind whatsoever caused by any receipt
>or use of this e-mail and attachments.
>
>====================================================================
>Companion Site: http://www.corej2eepatterns.com
>J2EE BluePrints: http://java.sun.com/blueprints/corej2eepatterns
>List Archive: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/j2eepatterns-interest.html
>Unsubscribing: email "signoff J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST" to listserv@(protected)
__________________________________________________________________
TISCALI ADSL
Solo con Tiscali Adsl navighi senza limiti e telefoni senza canone
Telecom a partire da 19,95 Euro/mese.
Attivala subito, I PRIMI DUE MESI SONO GRATIS! CLICCA QUI:
http://abbonati.tiscali.it/adsl/sa/1e25flat_tc/
====================================================================
Companion Site: http://www.corej2eepatterns.com
J2EE BluePrints: http://java.sun.com/blueprints/corej2eepatterns
List Archive: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/j2eepatterns-interest.html
Unsubscribing: email "signoff J2EEPATTERNS-INTEREST" to listserv@(protected)
