版权声明:本文为博主原创文章,未经博主允许不得转载。 https://blog.csdn.net/u013160017/article/details/78124936
ConcurrentLinkedQueue 和CountDownLatch 的使用
package com.chow.queue;
import java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentLinkedQueue;
import java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch;
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService;
import java.util.concurrent.Executors;
/**
* Created by zhouhaiming on 2017-5-26 17:22
* Email: [email protected]
*
* @Description:
*/
public class ConcurrentLinkedQueueTest {
private static ConcurrentLinkedQueue<Integer> queue = new ConcurrentLinkedQueue<Integer>();
private static int count = 2; // 线程个数
//CountDownLatch,一个同步辅助类,在完成一组正在其他线程中执行的操作之前,它允许一个或多个线程一直等待。
private static CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(count);
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
long timeStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
ExecutorService es = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(4);
ConcurrentLinkedQueueTest.offer();
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
es.submit(new Poll());
}
latch.await(); //使得主线程(main)阻塞直到latch.countDown()为零才继续执行
System.out.println("cost time " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - timeStart) + "ms");
es.shutdown();
}
/**
* 生产
*/
public static void offer() {
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
queue.offer(i);
}
}
/**
* 消费
*/
static class Poll implements Runnable {
public void run() {
// while (queue.size()>0) {
while (!queue.isEmpty()) {
System.out.println(queue.poll());
}
latch.countDown();
}
}
}
/*运行结果:
costtime 2360ms
改用while (queue.size()>0)后
运行结果:
cost time 46422ms
结果居然相差那么大,看了下ConcurrentLinkedQueue的API原来.size()是要遍历一遍集合的,难怪那么慢,所以尽量要避免用size而改用isEmpty().*/