Menu
Do these two keywords have exactly the same effect, or is there something I should be aware of?
549
Non synchronized -It is not-thread safe and can't be shared between many threads without proper synchronization code. While, Synchronized- It is thread-safe and can be shared with many threads.
Synchronized access means it is thread-safe. So different threads can access the collection concurrently without any problems, but it is probably a little bit slower depending on what you are doing. Unsynchronized is the opposite. Not thread-safe, but a little bit faster.
The word synchronization generally means sharing data between multiple processors or threads, while concurrency refers to a measure of– or the art of improving– how effectively an application allows multiple jobs required by that application (e.g. serving web page requests from a web server) to run simultaneously.
Lock framework works like synchronized blocks except locks can be more sophisticated than Java's synchronized blocks. Locks allow more flexible structuring of synchronized code.
According to this site: http://en.csharp-online.net/CSharp_FAQ:_What_is_the_difference_between_CSharp_lock_and_Java_synchronized, C# lock and Java synchronized code blocks are "semantically identical", while for methods, Java uses synchronized while C# uses an attribute: [MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.Synchronized)].
101
answered Sep 21 '22 18:09
One interesting difference not covered in the link posted by Keeg: as far as I'm aware, there's no equivalent method calls in Java for .NET's Monitor.Enter and Monitor.Exit, which the C# lock statement boils down to. That means you can't do the equivalent of Monitor.TryEnter either - although of course the java.util.concurrent.locks package (as of 1.5) has a variety of locks which have more features available.
35
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
