CODEWITHSUNDEEP
javamultithreadingblockingqueue
Neethu Lalitha
Neethu Lalitha

Reputation: 3071

Reading from blocking queue with multiple threads

I have a producer-consumer model using a blocking queue where 4 threads read files from a directory puts it to the blocking queue and 4 threads(consumer) reads from blocking queue.

My problem is every time only one consumer reads from the Blockingqueue and the other 3 consumer threads are not reading:

        final BlockingQueue<byte[]> queue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<>(QUEUE_SIZE);

            CompletableFuture<Void> completableFutureProducer = produceUrls(files, queue, checker);
//not providing code for produceData , it is working file with all 4 //threads writing to Blocking queue. Here is the consumer code.

    private CompletableFuture<Validator> consumeData(
            final Response checker,
            final CompletableFuture<Void> urls
    ) {
        return CompletableFuture.supplyAsync(checker, 4)
                .whenComplete((result, err) -> {
                    if (err != null) {
                        LOG.error("consuming url worker failed!", err);
                        urls.cancel(true);
                    }
    });


    }
  completableFutureProducer.join();
            completableFutureConsumer.join();

This is my code. Can someone tell me what I am doing wrong? Or help with correct code. Why is one consumer reading from the Blocking queue.

Adding code for Response class reading from Blocking queue :

    @Slf4j
    public final class Response implements Supplier<Check> {
        private final BlockingQueue<byte[]> data;
        private final AtomicBoolean producersComplete;
        private final Calendar calendar = Calendar.getInstance();
    
        public ResponseCode(
                final BlockingQueue<byte[]> data
        ) {
            this.data = data;
            producersDone = new AtomicBoolean();
    
        }
public void notifyProducersDone() {
    producersComplete.set(true);
}

        @Override
        public Check get() {
            try {
                Check check = null;
                try {
                    while (!data.isEmpty() || !producersDone.get()) {
                        final byte[] item = data.poll(1, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
                        if (item != null) {
                           LOG.info("{}",new String(item));
// I see only one thread printing result here .
                            validator = validateData(item);
                        }
                    }
        
                } catch (InterruptedException | IOException e) {
                    Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
                    throw new WriteException("Exception occurred while data validation", e);
        
                } 
                return check;
            } finally {
                LOG.info("Done reading data from BlockingQueue");
            }
        }
    }

Upvotes: 0

Views: 1819

Answers (3)

Alexei Kaigorodov
Alexei Kaigorodov

Reputation: 13515

4+4 threads is not that many, so you better do not use asynchronous tools like CompletableFuture. Simple multithreaded program would be simpler and work faster.

Having

 BlockingQueue<byte[]> data;

don't use data.poll();

use data.take();

Upvotes: 2

Enno Shioji
Enno Shioji

Reputation: 26882

It's hard to diagnose from this alone, but it's probably not correct to check for data.isEmpty() because the queue may happen to be temporarily empty (but later get items). So your threads might exit as soon as they encounter a temporarily empty queue.

Instead, you can exit if producers were done AND you got an empty result from the poll. That way the threads only exit when there are truly no more items to process.

It's a bit odd though that you are returning the result of the last item (alone). Are you sure this is what you want?

EDIT: I've done something very similar recently. Here is a class that reads from a file, transforms the lines in a multi-threaded way, then writes to a different file (the order of lines are preserved).
It also uses a BlockingQueue. It's very similar to your code, but it doesn't check for quue.isEmpty() for the aforementioned reason. It works fine for me.

Upvotes: 2

Antoniossss
Antoniossss

Reputation: 32507

When you have lets say 1 item in the queue, and 4 consumers, one of them will poll the item rendering queue to be empty. Then 3 of the rest of the consumers checks if queue.isEmpty(), and since it is - quits the loop.

Upvotes: 0

Related Questions