HashMap's javadoc states:
if the map is structurally modified at any time after the iterator is created, in any way except through the iterator's own remove method, the iterator will throw a ConcurrentModificationException.
I built a sample code that, based on the specification, is supposed to fail almost immediately and throw a ConcurrentModificationException;
Note: it sometimes does not fail with Java 7 (say 1 time out of 20) - I guess it has to do with thread scheduling (i.e. the 2 runnables are not interleaved).
Am I missing something? Why does the version run with Java 6 not throw a ConcurrentModificationException?
In substance, there are 2 Runnable tasks running in parallel (a countdownlatch is used to make them start approximately at the same time):
The main thread then checks how many keys have been added to the array.
Java 7 typical output (the iteration fails immediately):
java.util.ConcurrentModificationException
MAX i = 0
Java 6 typical output (the whole iteration goes through and the array contains all the added keys):
MAX i = 99
Code used:
public class Test1 {
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
final int SIZE = 100;
final Map<Integer, Integer> map = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
map.put(1, 1);
map.put(2, 2);
map.put(3, 3);
final int[] list = new int[SIZE];
final CountDownLatch start = new CountDownLatch(1);
Runnable put = new Runnable() {
@Override
public void run() {
try {
start.await();
for (int i = 4; i < SIZE; i++) {
map.put(i, i);
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
}
}
};
Runnable iterate = new Runnable() {
@Override
public void run() {
try {
start.await();
int i = 0;
for (Map.Entry<Integer, Integer> e : map.entrySet()) {
list[i++] = e.getKey();
Thread.sleep(1);
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
ex.printStackTrace();
}
}
};
ExecutorService e = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
e.submit(put);
e.submit(iterate);
e.shutdown();
start.countDown();
Thread.sleep(100);
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE; i++) {
if (list[i] == 0) {
System.out.println("MAX i = " + i);
break;
}
}
}
}
Note: using JDK 7u11 and JDK 6u38 (64 bits version) on an x86 machine.
HashMap is a non-synchronized class of the Java Collection Framework that contains null values and keys, whereas Map is a Java interface, which is used to map key-pair values.
HashMap, being a hashtable-based implementation, internally uses an array-based data structure to organize its elements according to the hash function. HashMap provides expected constant-time performance O(1) for most operations like add(), remove() and contains(). Therefore, it's significantly faster than a TreeMap.
Hashmaps are a very useful data structure for mapping some arbitrary data some other arbitrary data. They rely on a good hash function, the modulus function and a list of “buckets”. Some standard use cases for maps are joining 2 collections of data, or grouping data together by some common key.
Properties Of HashMap In Java : 1) HashMap holds the data in the form of key-value pairs where each key is associated with one value. 2) HashMap doesn't allow duplicate keys. But it can have duplicate values. 3) HashMap can have multiple null values and only one null key.
A HashMap however, store items in "key/value" pairs, and you can access them by an index of another type (e.g. a String). One object is used as a key (index) to another object (value). It can store different types: String keys and Integer values, or the same type, like: String keys and String values:
HashMap<K, V> is a part of Java’s collection since Java 1.2. This class is found in java.util package. It provides the basic implementation of the Map interface of Java. It stores the data in (Key, Value) pairs, and you can access them by an index of another type (e.g. an Integer).
Keys and values in a HashMap are actually objects. In the examples above, we used objects of type "String". Remember that a String in Java is an object (not a primitive type). To use other types, such as int, you must specify an equivalent wrapper class: Integer.
Java HashMap may have one null key and multiple null values. Java HashMap is non synchronized. Java HashMap maintains no order. The initial default capacity of Java HashMap class is 16 with a load factor of 0.75.
If we will look into HashMap
sources and compare them between Java 6 and Java 7 we will see such interesting difference:
transient volatile int modCount;
in Java6 and just transient int modCount;
in Java7.
I'm sure that it is cause for different behavior of mentioned code due to this:
if (modCount != expectedModCount)
throw new ConcurrentModificationException();
UPD: It seems to me, that this is a known Java 6/7 bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6625725 which was fixed in latest Java7.
UPD-2: Mr. @Renjith said, that he just tested and did not found any difference in behavior of HashMaps implementation. But I just tested it too.
My test was:
1) I have created HashMap2
class, which is absolutely copy of HashMap
from Java 6.
One important thing is we need to introduce here 2 new fields:
transient volatile Set<K> keySet = null;
and
transient volatile Collection<V> values = null;
2) Then I used this HashMap2
in test of this question and run it under Java 7
Result: it works like such test under Java 6
, i.e. there isn't any ConcurentModificationException
.
That all proves my conjecture. Q.E.D.
As a side note, ConcurrentModificationException
(despite the unfortunate name) is not intended to detect modification across multiple threads. it is only intended to catch modifications within a single thread. the effects of modifying a shared HashMap across multiple threads (without correct synchronization) are guaranteed to be broken regardless of the use of iterators or anything else.
In short, your test is bogus regardless of the jvm version and it is only "luck" that it does anything different at all. for example, this test could throw NPE or some other "impossible" exception due to the HashMap internals being in an inconsistent state when viewed cross thread.
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