ThreadPoolExecutor 与 ThreadLocal 配合使用中出现数据不一致问题

ThreadPoolExecutor 与 ThreadLocal 配合使用中出现数据不一致问题

前段时间写过一段测试代码,发现使用了ThreadLocal出现了数据不一致的问题,之前也一直用过,没有出现过.所以感到很疑惑.于是针对这个case研究了下源码

单元测试代码

/**
 * <p>
 * 测试ThreadLocal结合ThreadPoolExecutor是否存在数据不安全情况
 * </p>
 * 
 * @author sunla
 * @version 1.0
 */
public class ThreadLocalTest {

	private static final ThreadPoolExecutor EXECUTOR = new ThreadPoolExecutor(2, 2, 1000, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS,
			new LinkedBlockingDeque<Runnable>(20), new ThreadFactoryBuilder().setNameFormat("name-%s").build(),
			new ThreadPoolExecutor.AbortPolicy());
	private static final ThreadLocal<String> LOCAL = new ThreadLocal<String>();

	@Test
	public void startTest() throws Exception {
		LOCAL.set("main start");
		EXECUTOR.execute(()->{
			System.out.println(
					String.format("value is %s", LOCAL.get()));
			try {
TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS.sleep(1000);
			} 
			catch (InterruptedException e) {
				e.printStackTrace();
			}
		});
		System.out.println(
				String.format("value is %s",  LOCAL.get()));
	}
}

输出结果

NULL
main start

很奇怪.ThreadLocal 就是为了保持回话中变量共享 为什么不一致呢

我们平时使用ThreadLocal的场景 可以理解为会话中的数据共享,那怎么在这里出现了与期望不一致的结果呢?其实这跟ThreadLocal的内部实现有关系.

ThreadLocal 内部实现

    /**
     * Returns the value in the current thread's copy of this
     * thread-local variable.  If the variable has no value for the
     * current thread, it is first initialized to the value returned
     * by an invocation of the {@link #initialValue} method.
     *
     * @return the current thread's value of this thread-local
     */
    public T get() {
        Thread t = Thread.currentThread();
        ThreadLocalMap map = getMap(t);
        if (map != null) {
        /** threadLocalMap是内部实现的map
         *  特点是key是ThreadLocal的引用
         *  至于为什么这样设计?我们往下看   
         */
            ThreadLocalMap.Entry e = map.getEntry(this);
            if (e != null) {
                @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
                T result = (T)e.value;
                return result;
            }
        }
        return setInitialValue();
    }

    /**
     * Variant of set() to establish initialValue. Used instead
     * of set() in case user has overridden the set() method.
     *
     * @return the initial value
     */
    private T setInitialValue() {
        T value = initialValue();
        Thread t = Thread.currentThread();
        ThreadLocalMap map = getMap(t);
        if (map != null)
            map.set(this, value);
        else
            createMap(t, value);
        return value;
    }
    /** 每个thread都有独立的threadlocalmap */
	ThreadLocalMap getMap(Thread t) {
        return t.threadLocals;
    }

ThreadLocalMap实现

static class ThreadLocalMap {

        /**
         * The entries in this hash map extend WeakReference, using
         * its main ref field as the key (which is always a
         * ThreadLocal object).  Note that null keys (i.e. entry.get()
         * == null) mean that the key is no longer referenced, so the
         * entry can be expunged from table.  Such entries are referred to
         * as "stale entries" in the code that follows.
         */
        static class Entry extends WeakReference<ThreadLocal<?>> {
            /** The value associated with this ThreadLocal. */
            Object value;

            Entry(ThreadLocal<?> k, Object v) {
                super(k);
                value = v;
            }
        }
        //TO DO
  }

看了threadLocal的实现 我们知道了,原来thread local 实例有个map 存储的key就是线程的引用,value就是需要共享的变量.

那我们上面的代码 难道获取的不是同一个线程?

看过ThreadPoolExecutor实现的就知道 真的不是一个

ThreadPoolExecutor 实现

/**
* 添加工作线程
*/
private boolean addWorker(Runnable firstTask, boolean core) {
        //TO DO
        w = new Worker(firstTask);
        final Thread t = w.thread;
        //TO DO
    }
/** 工作类 实现runnable接口 */
private final class Worker
        extends AbstractQueuedSynchronizer
        implements Runnable
    {
		Worker(Runnable firstTask) {
            setState(-1);
            this.firstTask = firstTask;
            this.thread = getThreadFactory().newThread(this);
        }
        /** 重写run方法 最终执行的就是runWorker */
		public void run() {
            runWorker(this);
        }
	}
	

这下真相大白了,原因在线程池中会开辟新的线程执行task.如果在主线程中(main) 放入到ThreadLocal的value在task中获取到的就不再是main线程的ref了.而且线程池自己开辟的. 所以导致数据不一致.

### 这里提个问题 threadlocal有个remove方法,

如果我们不显示调用 会怎么样?

第二节 ThreadLocal 内存泄漏

在上文阅读源码过程中 发现threadLoalMap 中的内部类Entry 是继承weakReference 的

        static class Entry extends WeakReference<ThreadLocal<?>> {
         /** The value associated with this ThreadLocal. */
         Object value;

         Entry(ThreadLocal<?> k, Object v) {
             super(k);
             value = v;
         }
     }

从构造函数中知道 把threadLocal 的key 调用了父类构造方法

public class WeakReference<T> extends Reference<T> {

 /**
  * Creates a new weak reference that refers to the given object.  The new
  * reference is not registered with any queue.
  *
  * @param referent object the new weak reference will refer to
  */
 public WeakReference(T referent) {
     super(referent);
 }

 /**
  * Creates a new weak reference that refers to the given object and is
  * registered with the given queue.
  *
  * @param referent object the new weak reference will refer to
  * @param q the queue with which the reference is to be registered,
  *          or <tt>null</tt> if registration is not required
  */
 public WeakReference(T referent, ReferenceQueue<? super T> q) {
     super(referent, q);
 }
}

最终的效果就跟创建一个key(弱引用) 指向threadLocal的效果一样的

WeakReference<ThreadLocal> key = new WeakReference(new ThreadLocal());

那弱引用有什么用呢?
java 的引用类型有3种(都跟gc 有关系)

strong reference 强引用
Student student = new Student();
只有在gc root 不可达 而且触发gc情况下才会回收

weak reference 弱引用
Student student = new Student();
WeakReference weak = new WeakReference(student);
Student stu = weak.get();
当没有强引用指向student这个对象 而只有一个weak弱引用指向student的时候 只要有gc 就会被回收

softReference 软引用
Student student = new Student();
SoftReference weak = new SoftReference(student);
Student stu = weak.get();
当没有强引用指向student这个对象 而只有一个weak软引用指向student的时候 当触发gc 而且内存不足的时候才会回收

现在回归正题 不显示调用remove 会内存泄露么?

看段代码

ThreadLocal<String> threadLocal = new ThreadLocal<String>();
threadLocal.set("haha");
threadLocal = null;

我们结合弱引用知识 假设
1.ThreadLocalMap 的entry 的 key 是个强引用
那么 代码中主动声明的
threadLocal = null;
会被回收么（当前线程还在runing）? 答案是 NO
因为threadLocalMap 中的数组对象还有它的强引用呢
2.ThreadLocalMap 的entry 的 key 是个弱引用
还会被回收么（当前线程还在runing） 答案是YES 。

那这样是不是就代表不会内存泄露了? 我们还忘了entry这个实体呢。

        private void set(ThreadLocal<?> key, Object value) {

            // We don't use a fast path as with get() because it is at
            // least as common to use set() to create new entries as
            // it is to replace existing ones, in which case, a fast
            // path would fail more often than not.

            Entry[] tab = table;
            int len = tab.length;
            int i = key.threadLocalHashCode & (len-1);

            for (Entry e = tab[i];
                 e != null;
                 e = tab[i = nextIndex(i, len)]) {
                ThreadLocal<?> k = e.get();

                if (k == key) {
                    e.value = value;
                    return;
                }

                if (k == null) {
                    replaceStaleEntry(key, value, i);
                    return;
                }
            }
            // 如果强大的强引用呢
            tab[i] = new Entry(key, value);
            int sz = ++size;
            if (!cleanSomeSlots(i, sz) && sz >= threshold)
                rehash();
        }

所以说主动调用remove 是一种自我保护 也是一个好习惯.