In my C++ project I have a singleton class. During project execution, sometimes the same singleton class is accessed from two different thread simultaneously. Resulting in two instances of the singleton class is produced, which is a problem.
How to handle such a cases?
Then it's not a singleton :-)
You'll probably need to show us some code but your basic problem will be with the synchronisation areas.
If done right, there is no way that two threads can create two objects of the class. In fact, the class itself should be the place where the singleton nature is being enforced so that erroneous clients cannot corrupt the intent.
The basic structure will be:
lock mutex
if instance doesn't exist:
instance = new object
unlock mutex
Without something like mutex protection (or critical code section or any other manner in which you can guarantee at the language/library level that two threads can't run the code simultaneously), there's a possibility that thread one may be swapped out between the check and the instantiation, leading to two possible instances of your "singleton".
And, as others will no doubt suggest, singletons may well be a bad idea. I'm not quite in the camp where every use is wrong, the usual problem is that people treat them as "god" objects. They can have their uses but there's often a better way, though I won't presume to tell you you need to change that, since I don't know your use case.
If you get two different instances in different threads you are doing something wrong. Threads, unlike processes, share their memory. So memory allocated in one thread (e.g. for an object instance) is also usable in the other.
If your singleton getting two copies its not guarded with mutex. lock a mutex when getting/accessing/setting the internal object.
I believe You are done something like this if(!_instance)_instance = new Singleton() there lies a critical section. which you need to safe guard with a mutex.
Do not use a singleton, It is a well known Anti-Pattern.
A good read:
Singletons: Solving problems you didn’t know you never had since 1995
If you still want to persist and go ahead with it for reasons known only to you, What you need is a thread safe singleton implementation, something like this:
YourClass* YourClass::getInstance()
{
MutexLocker locker(YourClass::m_mutex);
if(!m_instanceFlag)
{
m_instance = new YourClass();
m_instanceFlag = true;
}
return m_instance;
}
Where MutexLocker is a wrapper class for an normally used Mutex, which locks the mutex when creating its instance and unlocks the mutex the function ends.
