DZone
Thanks for visiting DZone today,
Edit Profile
  • Manage Email Subscriptions
  • How to Post to DZone
  • Article Submission Guidelines
Sign Out View Profile
  • Post an Article
  • Manage My Drafts
Newsletter
Log In / Join
Refcards Trend Reports
Events Video Library
Refcards
Trend Reports

Events

View Events Video Library

Related

  • Java Concurrency: Understanding the ‘Volatile’ Keyword
  • DataWeave Interview Question: Concatenate Elements of an Array
  • Testing Java and Spring Applications With Kotlin: Low-Risk to Adoption
  • Dynamic Arrays, Spill, and LET: What Changed in Excel and Why It Matters for Java Applications

Trending

  • How to Migrate From C/C++ to Rust: A Practical Guide for Embedded IoT Systems
  • Why AI Agents Need a Shared Enterprise Ontology
  • Running a Self-Hosted WAF in Production: Practical Lessons From SafeLine
  • The SDLC After AI

Draft This article hasn't been published, so readers can't see it.

In moderation This article is waiting for review, so readers can't see it yet.

Deleted This article has been deleted, so readers can't see it.

  1. DZone
  2. Data Engineering
  3. Data
  4. ConcurrentHashMap: Call Only One Method Per Key

ConcurrentHashMap: Call Only One Method Per Key

Using the ConcurrentHashMap in a thread-safe way is easy.

By 
Thomas Krieger
·
Updated Mar. 16, 20 · Tutorial
Post on X (opens in a new tab) Share on LinkedIn (opens in a new tab)
25.6K Views

Join the DZone community Save articles, join the discussion, and download Refcards and Trend Reports with a free account.

Join for free Already a member? Log in

Each method of ConcurrentHashMap is thread-safe. But calling multiple methods from ConcurrentHashMap for the same key leads to race conditions. And calling the same method from ConcurrentHashMap recursively for different keys leads to deadlocks.

 

Let us look at an example to see why this happens:

 

Calling Multiple Methods

 

In the following test, I use two methods from ConcurrentHashMap for the same key 1. The method  update, line 3 till 10, first gets the value from the  ConcurrentHashMap  using the method  get. Than update increments the value and put it back using the method  put , line 6 and 8:

 

    Java   
         
   
           
     
       
     
     
       
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
            x         
            33           
          
           
         
          
           
         
          
                       
          
             1            
            
import com.vmlens.api.AllInterleavings;
           
             2            
            
public class TestUpdateWrong {
           
             3            
            
    public void update(ConcurrentHashMap<Integer, Integer> map) {
           
             4            
            
        Integer result = map.get(1);
           
             5            
            
        if (result == null) {
           
             6            
            
            map.put(1, 1);
           
             7            
            
        } else {
           
             8            
            
            map.put(1, result + 1);
           
             9            
            
        }
           
             10            
            
    }
           
             11            
            
    @Test
           
             12            
            
    public void testUpdate() throws InterruptedException {
           
             13            
            
        try (AllInterleavings allInterleavings = 
           
             14            
            
            new AllInterleavings("TestUpdateWrong");) {
           
             15            
            
            while (allInterleavings.hasNext()) {
           
             16            
            
                final ConcurrentHashMap<Integer, Integer> map = 
           
             17            
            
                        new ConcurrentHashMap<Integer, Integer>();
           
             18            
            
                Thread first = new Thread(() -> {
           
             19            
            
                    update(map);
           
             20            
            
                });
           
             21            
            
                Thread second = new Thread(() -> {
           
             22            
            
                    update(map);
           
             23            
            
                });
           
             24            
            
                first.start();
           
             25            
            
                second.start();
           
             26            
            
                first.join();
           
             27            
            
                second.join();
           
             28            
            
                assertEquals(2, map.get(1).intValue());
           
             29            
            
            }
           
             30            
            
        }
           
             31            
            
    }
           
             32            
            
}
      
       
     
      
       
       

 

To test what happens  I use two threads, created in line 18 and 21. I start those two threads, in line 25 and 25. And then wait till both are ended using thread join,in line 26 and 27. After both threads are stopped I check if the value is indeed two,line 28.

 

To test all thread interleavings we put the complete test in a while loop iterating over all thread interleavings using the class  AllInterleavings from vmlens, line 15. Running the test I see the following error:

 

java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<2> but was:<1>

 


 

To see why the result is one, not two as expected we can look at the report vmlens generated:

 

Image title

 

So. the problem is that first both threads call get, and after that, both threads call put. So, both threads see an empty value and update the value to one. This leads to a result of one and not, as expected, two. The trick to solving this race condition is to use only one method instead of two methods to update the value. Using the method compute, we can do this. So, the correct version looks like this:

 

public void update() {
    map.compute(1, (key, value) -> {
        if (value == null) {
            return 1;
        } else {
            return value + 1;
        }
    });
}

 


 

Calling the Same Method Recursively

 

Now, let us look at an example for calling the same method from ConcurrentHashMap recursively:

 

public class TestUpdateRecursive {
    private final ConcurrentHashMap<Integer, Integer> map = 
            new ConcurrentHashMap<Integer, Integer>();
    public TestUpdateRecursive() {
        map.put(1, 1);
        map.put(2, 2);
    }
    public void update12() {
        map.compute(1,  (key,value) ->   {   
               map.compute(2, ( k , v ) ->  {  return 2; }  );   
               return 2;       
        });
    }   
    public void update21() {
        map.compute(2,  (key,value) ->   {   
               map.compute(1, ( k , v ) ->  {  return 2; }  );   
               return 2;       
        });
    }
    @Test
    public void testUpdate() throws InterruptedException    {
        ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
        executor.execute( () -> { update12();   }  );    
        executor.execute( () -> { update21();   }  );
        executor.shutdown();
        executor.awaitTermination(10, TimeUnit.MINUTES);
    }   

}

 


 

Here, we call the compute method inside of the compute method for different keys. Once for the key, one then two, and once for the key, two then one. If we run the test, we see the following deadlock:

 

Image title

 

To understand why this deadlock happens, we have to look at the internals of the ConcurrentHashMap. ConcurrentHashMap uses an array to store the mapping between the keys and the values. Every time we update such a mapping of the ConcurrentHashMap, it locks the array element in which the mapping is stored. So in our test, the call to compute for the key one locked the array element for the key one. And then, we try to lock the array element for the key two. But this key is already locked by the other thread who called compute for key two and tries to lock the array element for the key one. A deadlock.

 

Note that only updates need a lock to an array element. Methods that are read-only, like, for example,get, do not use locks. So, it is no problem to use a get method inside a compute call.

 

Conclusion

 

Using the ConcurrentHashMap in a thread-safe way is easy. Select one method that best fits your needs — and use it exactly once per key

Testing Data structure Lock (computer science) Element Threading Race condition Interleaving (disk storage) Java (programming language)

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

Related

  • Java Concurrency: Understanding the ‘Volatile’ Keyword
  • DataWeave Interview Question: Concatenate Elements of an Array
  • Testing Java and Spring Applications With Kotlin: Low-Risk to Adoption
  • Dynamic Arrays, Spill, and LET: What Changed in Excel and Why It Matters for Java Applications

Partner Resources

×

Comments

Loading comments

The comments didn't load

Please try again in a moment.

Likes

Loading

The next likes didn't load. Please try again.

The likes didn't load

Please try again in a moment.

See who liked this

Log in or join DZone for free to see who liked this article.

Log in Join for free
  • RSS
  • X
  • Facebook

ABOUT US

  • About DZone
  • Support and feedback
  • Community research

ADVERTISE

  • Advertise with DZone

CONTRIBUTE ON DZONE

  • Article Submission Guidelines
  • Become a Contributor
  • Core Program
  • Visit the Writers' Zone

LEGAL

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy

CONTACT US

  • 3343 Perimeter Hill Drive
  • Suite 215
  • Nashville, TN 37211
  • [email protected]

Let's be friends:

  • RSS
  • X
  • Facebook