Skip to content

What is the advantage of this lock? #5987

@qiaolin-li

Description

@qiaolin-li

locks.putIfAbsent(key, new Object());
synchronized (locks.get(key)) {
clients = referenceClientMap.get(key);
// dubbo check
if (checkClientCanUse(clients)) {
batchClientRefIncr(clients);
return clients;
}
// connectNum must be greater than or equal to 1
connectNum = Math.max(connectNum, 1);
// If the clients is empty, then the first initialization is
if (CollectionUtils.isEmpty(clients)) {
clients = buildReferenceCountExchangeClientList(url, connectNum);
referenceClientMap.put(key, clients);
} else {
for (int i = 0; i < clients.size(); i++) {
ReferenceCountExchangeClient referenceCountExchangeClient = clients.get(i);
// If there is a client in the list that is no longer available, create a new one to replace him.
if (referenceCountExchangeClient == null || referenceCountExchangeClient.isClosed()) {
clients.set(i, buildReferenceCountExchangeClient(url));
continue;
}
referenceCountExchangeClient.incrementAndGetCount();
}
}
/*
* I understand that the purpose of the remove operation here is to avoid the expired url key
* always occupying this memory space.
*/
locks.remove(key);
return clients;

Why not use the key to lock

synchronized (key.intern()) {
 // ...... content
}

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type
    No fields configured for issues without a type.

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions