Non blocking buffer in java

Question

In a high volume multi-threaded java project I need to implement a non-blocking buffer.

In my scenario I have a web layer that receives ~20,000 requests per second. I need to accumulate some of those requests in some data structure (aka the desired buffer) and when it is full (let's assume it is full when it contains 1000 objects) those objects should be serialized to a file that will be sent to another server for further processing.

The implementation shoud be a non-blocking one. I examined ConcurrentLinkedQueue but I'm not sure it can fit the job.

I think I need to use 2 queues in a way that once the first gets filled it is replaced by a new one, and the full queue ("the first") gets delivered for further processing. This is the basic idea I'm thinking of at the moment, and still I don't know if it is feasible since I'm not sure I can switch pointers in java (in order to switch the full queue).

Any advice?

Thanks

Answer 1

What I usualy do with requirements like this is create a pool of buffers at app startup and store the references in a BlockingQueue. The producer thread pops buffers, fills them and then pushes the refs to another queue upon which the consumers are waiting. When consumer/s are done, (data written to fine, in your case), the refs get pushed back onto the pool queue for re-use. This provides lots of buffer storage, no need for expensive bulk copying inside locks, eliminates GC actions, provides flow-control, (if the pool empties, the producer is forced to wait until some buffers are returned), and prevents memory-runaway, all in one design.

More: I've used such designs for many years in various other languages too, (C++, Delphi), and it works well. I have an 'ObjectPool' class that contains the BlockingQueue and a 'PooledObject' class to derive the buffers from. PooledObject has an internal private reference to its pool, (it gets initialized on pool creation), so allowing a parameterless release() method. This means that, in complex designs with more than one pool, a buffer always gets released to the correct pool, reducing cockup-potential.

Most of my apps have a GUI, so I usually dump the pool level to a status bar on a timer, every second, say. I can then see roughly how much loading there is, if any buffers are leaking, (number consistently goes down and then app eventually deadlocks on empty pool), or I am double-releasing, (number consistently goes up and app eventually crashes).

It's also fairly easy to change the number of buffers at runtime, by either creating more and pushing them into the pool, or by waiting on the pool, removing buffers and letting GC destroy them.

Answer 2

I think you have a very good point with your solution. You would need two queues, the processingQueue would be the buffer size you want (in your example that would be 1000) while the waitingQueue would be a lot bigger. Every time the processingQueue is full it will put its contents in the specified file and then grab the first 1000 from the waitingQueue (or less if the waiting queue has fewer than 1000).

My only concern about this is that you mention 20000 per second and a buffer of 1000. I know the 1000 was an example, but if you don't make it bigger it might just be that you are moving the problem to the waitingQueue rather than solving it, as your waitingQueue will receive 1000 new ones faster than the processingQueue can process them, giving you a buffer overflow in the waitingQueue.