File APIs for Java Developers
Manipulate DOC, XLS, PPT, PDF and many others from your application.
The moose likes Threads and Synchronization and the fly likes Thread synchronization for Static factory method Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login

Win a copy of Java Interview Guide this week in the Jobs Discussion forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Java » Threads and Synchronization
Bookmark "Thread synchronization for Static factory method" Watch "Thread synchronization for Static factory method" New topic

Thread synchronization for Static factory method

Siva Masilamani
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 19, 2008
Posts: 385

I am trying to understand if I should synchronize the below factory method.I tested the code with three sample thread and I am always getting the correct object for each thread(meaning Thread 1 always shows TYPE1,thread2 always show TYPE2 and thread3 always shows TYPE3 but I am still thinking that this may not be the case always unless I synchronize the factory method else it will not be thread safe meaning thread 1 could get type 2 or type 3 also.

Also another option is moving the static field b inside method so that it will be a local variable.

Please correct me If am wrong.

Thanks in advance.

Factory Class:


Failure is not an option.
Jayesh A Lalwani
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Jan 17, 2008
Posts: 2748

If you want to reproduce the error, you will need more than a 100 iterations in the loop. It could be that 100 loops run so fast that the first thread is done before the second starts

Making b into a local variable is a much better option. Each thread will get it's own variable.
Siva Masilamani
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 19, 2008
Posts: 385
Thanks for your input but I was able to prove that this is not threadsafe (atleast in this case) by adding Thread.sleep(200) in the Facotry method and I see that thread started getting wrong object.
Mike Simmons
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 05, 2008
Posts: 3028
Excellent. But Jayesh's other point stands. Your class field b is completely unnecessary and should be removed; it's the source of the bug you're observing. I would also recommend making the binders variable final. That's not strictly necessary for a static field, but good practice (and prevents anyone else from changing it without realizing it's supposed to be constant). If the field were non-static, then making it final would be necessary in order to access it in a thread-safe manner without synchronization.
I agree. Here's the link:
subject: Thread synchronization for Static factory method
It's not a secret anymore!