Producer/Consumer threads using a Queue

Question

I'd like to create some sort of Producer/Consumer threading app. But I'm not sure what the best way to implement a queue between the two.

So I've some up with two ideas (both of which could be entirely wrong). I would like to know which would be better and if they both suck then what would be the best way to implement the queue. It's mainly my implementation of the queue in these examples that I'm concerned about. I'm extending a Queue class that is an in house class and is thread safe. Below are two examples with 4 classes each.

Main class-

public class SomeApp
{
    private Consumer consumer;
    private Producer producer;

    public static void main (String args[])
    {
        consumer = new Consumer();
        producer = new Producer();
    }
} 

Consumer class-

public class Consumer implements Runnable
{
    public Consumer()
    {
        Thread consumer = new Thread(this);
        consumer.start();
    }

    public void run()
    {
        while(true)
        {
            //get an object off the queue
            Object object = QueueHandler.dequeue();
            //do some stuff with the object
        }
    }
}

Producer class-

public class Producer implements Runnable
{
    public Producer()
    {
        Thread producer = new Thread(this);
        producer.start();
    }

    public void run()
    {
        while(true)
        {
            //add to the queue some sort of unique object
            QueueHandler.enqueue(new Object());
        }
    }
}

Queue class-

public class QueueHandler
{
    //This Queue class is a thread safe (written in house) class
    public static Queue<Object> readQ = new Queue<Object>(100);

    public static void enqueue(Object object)
    {
        //do some stuff
        readQ.add(object);
    }

    public static Object dequeue()
    {
        //do some stuff
        return readQ.get();
    }
}

OR

Main class-

public class SomeApp
{
    Queue<Object> readQ;
    private Consumer consumer;
    private Producer producer;

    public static void main (String args[])
    {
        readQ = new Queue<Object>(100);
        consumer = new Consumer(readQ);
        producer = new Producer(readQ);
    }
} 

Consumer class-

public class Consumer implements Runnable
{
    Queue<Object> queue;

    public Consumer(Queue<Object> readQ)
    {
        queue = readQ;
        Thread consumer = new Thread(this);
        consumer.start();
    }

    public void run()
    {
        while(true)
        {
            //get an object off the queue
            Object object = queue.dequeue();
            //do some stuff with the object
        }
    }
}

Producer class-

public class Producer implements Runnable
{
    Queue<Object> queue;

    public Producer(Queue<Object> readQ)
    {
        queue = readQ;
        Thread producer = new Thread(this);
        producer.start();
    }

    public void run()
    {

        while(true)
        {
            //add to the queue some sort of unique object
            queue.enqueue(new Object());
        }
    }
}

Queue class-

//the extended Queue class is a thread safe (written in house) class
public class QueueHandler extends Queue<Object>
{    
    public QueueHandler(int size)
    {
        super(size); //All I'm thinking about now is McDonalds.
    }

    public void enqueue(Object object)
    {
        //do some stuff
        readQ.add();
    }

    public Object dequeue()
    {
        //do some stuff
        return readQ.get();
    }
}

And go!

Answer 1

Java 5+ has all the tools you need for this kind of thing. You will want to:

1. Put all your Producers in one ExecutorService;
2. Put all your Consumers in another ExecutorService;
3. If necessary, communicate between the two using a BlockingQueue.

I say "if necessary" for (3) because from my experience it's an unnecessary step. All you do is submit new tasks to the consumer executor service. So:

final ExecutorService producers = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(100);
final ExecutorService consumers = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(100);
while (/* has more work */) {
  producers.submit(...);
}
producers.shutdown();
producers.awaitTermination(Long.MAX_VALUE, TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS);
consumers.shutdown();
consumers.awaitTermination(Long.MAX_VALUE, TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS);

So the producers submit directly to consumers.

Answer 2

OK, as others note, the best thing to do is to use java.util.concurrent package. I highly recommend "Java Concurrency in Practice". It's a great book that covers almost everything you need to know.

As for your particular implementation, as I noted in the comments, don't start Threads from Constructors -- it can be unsafe.

Leaving that aside, the second implementation seem better. You don't want to put queues in static fields. You are probably just loosing flexibility for nothing.

If you want to go ahead with your own implementation (for learning purpose I guess?), supply a start() method at least. You should construct the object (you can instantiate the Thread object), and then call start() to start the thread.

Edit: ExecutorService have their own queue so this can be confusing.. Here's something to get you started.

public class Main {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        //The numbers are just silly tune parameters. Refer to the API.
        //The important thing is, we are passing a bounded queue.
        ExecutorService consumer = new ThreadPoolExecutor(1,4,30,TimeUnit.SECONDS,new LinkedBlockingQueue<Runnable>(100));

        //No need to bound the queue for this executor.
        //Use utility method instead of the complicated Constructor.
        ExecutorService producer = Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor();

        Runnable produce = new Produce(consumer);
        producer.submit(produce);   
    }
}

class Produce implements Runnable {
    private final ExecutorService consumer;

    public Produce(ExecutorService consumer) {
        this.consumer = consumer;
    }

    @Override
    public void run() {
        Pancake cake = Pan.cook();
        Runnable consume = new Consume(cake);
        consumer.submit(consume);
    }
}

class Consume implements Runnable {
    private final Pancake cake;

    public Consume(Pancake cake){
        this.cake = cake;
    }

    @Override
    public void run() {
        cake.eat();
    }
}

Further EDIT: For producer, instead of while(true), you can do something like:

@Override
public void run(){
    while(!Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()){
        //do stuff
    }
}

This way you can shutdown the executor by calling .shutdownNow(). If you'd use while(true), it won't shutdown.

Also note that the Producer is still vulnerable to RuntimeExceptions (i.e. one RuntimeException will halt the processing)

Answer 3

I have extended cletus proposed answer to working code example.

1. One ExecutorService (pes) accepts Producer tasks.
2. One ExecutorService (ces) accepts Consumer tasks.
3. Both Producer and Consumer shares BlockingQueue.
4. Multiple Producer tasks generates different numbers.
5. Any of Consumer tasks can consume number generated by Producer

Code:

import java.util.concurrent.*;

public class ProducerConsumerWithES {
    public static void main(String args[]){
         BlockingQueue<Integer> sharedQueue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<Integer>();

         ExecutorService pes = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);
         ExecutorService ces = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(2);

         pes.submit(new Producer(sharedQueue,1));
         pes.submit(new Producer(sharedQueue,2));
         ces.submit(new Consumer(sharedQueue,1));
         ces.submit(new Consumer(sharedQueue,2));
         // shutdown should happen somewhere along with awaitTermination
         / * https://stackoverflow.com/questions/36644043/how-to-properly-shutdown-java-executorservice/36644320#36644320 */
         pes.shutdown();
         ces.shutdown();
    }
}
class Producer implements Runnable {
    private final BlockingQueue<Integer> sharedQueue;
    private int threadNo;
    public Producer(BlockingQueue<Integer> sharedQueue,int threadNo) {
        this.threadNo = threadNo;
        this.sharedQueue = sharedQueue;
    }
    @Override
    public void run() {
        for(int i=1; i<= 5; i++){
            try {
                int number = i+(10*threadNo);
                System.out.println("Produced:" + number + ":by thread:"+ threadNo);
                sharedQueue.put(number);
            } catch (Exception err) {
                err.printStackTrace();
            }
        }
    }
}

class Consumer implements Runnable{
    private final BlockingQueue<Integer> sharedQueue;
    private int threadNo;
    public Consumer (BlockingQueue<Integer> sharedQueue,int threadNo) {
        this.sharedQueue = sharedQueue;
        this.threadNo = threadNo;
    }
    @Override
    public void run() {
        while(true){
            try {
                int num = sharedQueue.take();
                System.out.println("Consumed: "+ num + ":by thread:"+threadNo);
            } catch (Exception err) {
               err.printStackTrace();
            }
        }
    }   
}

output:

Produced:11:by thread:1
Produced:21:by thread:2
Produced:22:by thread:2
Consumed: 11:by thread:1
Produced:12:by thread:1
Consumed: 22:by thread:1
Consumed: 21:by thread:2
Produced:23:by thread:2
Consumed: 12:by thread:1
Produced:13:by thread:1
Consumed: 23:by thread:2
Produced:24:by thread:2
Consumed: 13:by thread:1
Produced:14:by thread:1
Consumed: 24:by thread:2
Produced:25:by thread:2
Consumed: 14:by thread:1
Produced:15:by thread:1
Consumed: 25:by thread:2
Consumed: 15:by thread:1

Note. If you don't need multiple Producers and Consumers, keep single Producer and Consumer. I have added multiple Producers and Consumers to showcase capabilities of BlockingQueue among multiple Producers and Consumers.

Answer 4

You are reinventing the wheel.

If you need persistence and other enterprise features use JMS (I'd suggest ActiveMq).

If you need fast in-memory queues use one of the impementations of java's Queue.

If you need to support java 1.4 or earlier, use Doug Lea's excellent concurrent package.

Answer 5

This is a very simple code.

import java.util.*;

// @author : rootTraveller, June 2017

class ProducerConsumer {
    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
        Queue<Integer> queue = new LinkedList<>();
        Integer buffer = new Integer(10);  //Important buffer or queue size, change as per need.

        Producer producerThread = new Producer(queue, buffer, "PRODUCER");
        Consumer consumerThread = new Consumer(queue, buffer, "CONSUMER");

        producerThread.start();  
        consumerThread.start();
    }   
}

class Producer extends Thread {
    private Queue<Integer> queue;
    private int queueSize ;

    public Producer (Queue<Integer> queueIn, int queueSizeIn, String ThreadName){
        super(ThreadName);
        this.queue = queueIn;
        this.queueSize = queueSizeIn;
    }

    public void run() {
        while(true){
            synchronized (queue) {
                while(queue.size() == queueSize){
                    System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " FULL         : waiting...\n");
                    try{
                        queue.wait();   //Important
                    } catch (Exception ex) {
                        ex.printStackTrace();
                    }
                }

                //queue empty then produce one, add and notify  
                int randomInt = new Random().nextInt(); 
                System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " producing... : " + randomInt); 
                queue.add(randomInt); 
                queue.notifyAll();  //Important
            } //synchronized ends here : NOTE
        }
    }
}

class Consumer extends Thread {
    private Queue<Integer> queue;
    private int queueSize;

    public Consumer(Queue<Integer> queueIn, int queueSizeIn, String ThreadName){
        super (ThreadName);
        this.queue = queueIn;
        this.queueSize = queueSizeIn;
    }

    public void run() {
        while(true){
            synchronized (queue) {
                while(queue.isEmpty()){
                    System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " Empty        : waiting...\n");
                    try {
                        queue.wait();  //Important
                    } catch (Exception ex) {
                        ex.printStackTrace();
                    }
                }

                //queue not empty then consume one and notify
                System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " consuming... : " + queue.remove());
                queue.notifyAll();
            } //synchronized ends here : NOTE
        }
    }
}

Answer 6

1. Java code "BlockingQueue" which has synchronized put and get method.
2. Java code "Producer" , producer thread to produce data.
3. Java code "Consumer" , consumer thread to consume the data produced.
4. Java code "ProducerConsumer_Main", main function to start the producer and consumer thread.

BlockingQueue.java

public class BlockingQueue 
{
    int item;
    boolean available = false;

    public synchronized void put(int value) 
    {
        while (available == true)
        {
            try 
            {
                wait();
            } catch (InterruptedException e) { 
            } 
        }

        item = value;
        available = true;
        notifyAll();
    }

    public synchronized int get()
    {
        while(available == false)
        {
            try
            {
                wait();
            }
            catch(InterruptedException e){
            }
        }

        available = false;
        notifyAll();
        return item;
    }
}

Consumer.java

package com.sukanya.producer_Consumer;

public class Consumer extends Thread
{
    blockingQueue queue;
    private int number;
    Consumer(BlockingQueue queue,int number)
    {
        this.queue = queue;
        this.number = number;
    }

    public void run()
    {
        int value = 0;

        for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) 
        {
            value = queue.get();
            System.out.println("Consumer #" + this.number+ " got: " + value);
        }
    }
}

ProducerConsumer_Main.java

package com.sukanya.producer_Consumer;

public class ProducerConsumer_Main 
{
    public static void main(String args[])
    {
        BlockingQueue queue = new BlockingQueue();
        Producer producer1 = new Producer(queue,1);
        Consumer consumer1 = new Consumer(queue,1);
        producer1.start();
        consumer1.start();
    }
}

Answer 7

Use this typesafe pattern with poison pills:

public sealed interface BaseMessage {

    final class ValidMessage<T> implements BaseMessage {

        @Nonnull
        private final T value;


        public ValidMessage(@Nonnull T value) {
            this.value = value;
        }

        @Nonnull
        public T getValue() {
            return value;
        }

        @Override
        public boolean equals(Object o) {
            if (this == o) return true;
            if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass()) return false;
            ValidMessage<?> that = (ValidMessage<?>) o;
            return value.equals(that.value);
        }

        @Override
        public int hashCode() {
            return Objects.hash(value);
        }

        @Override
        public String toString() {
            return "ValidMessage{value=%s}".formatted(value);
        }
    }

    final class PoisonedMessage implements BaseMessage {

        public static final PoisonedMessage INSTANCE = new PoisonedMessage();


        private PoisonedMessage() {
        }

        @Override
        public String toString() {
            return "PoisonedMessage{}";
        }
    }
}

public class Producer implements Callable<Void> {

    @Nonnull
    private final BlockingQueue<BaseMessage> messages;

    Producer(@Nonnull BlockingQueue<BaseMessage> messages) {
        this.messages = messages;
    }

    @Override
    public Void call() throws Exception {
        messages.put(new BaseMessage.ValidMessage<>(1));
        messages.put(new BaseMessage.ValidMessage<>(2));
        messages.put(new BaseMessage.ValidMessage<>(3));
        messages.put(BaseMessage.PoisonedMessage.INSTANCE);
        return null;
    }
}

public class Consumer implements Callable<Void> {

    @Nonnull
    private final BlockingQueue<BaseMessage> messages;

    private final int maxPoisons;


    public Consumer(@Nonnull BlockingQueue<BaseMessage> messages, int maxPoisons) {
        this.messages = messages;
        this.maxPoisons = maxPoisons;
    }

    @Override
    public Void call() throws Exception {
        int poisonsReceived = 0;
        while (poisonsReceived < maxPoisons && !Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()) {
            BaseMessage message = messages.take();
            if (message instanceof BaseMessage.ValidMessage<?> vm) {
                Integer value = (Integer) vm.getValue();
                System.out.println(value);
            } else if (message instanceof BaseMessage.PoisonedMessage) {
                ++poisonsReceived;
            } else {
                throw new IllegalArgumentException("Invalid BaseMessage type: " + message);
            }
        }
        return null;
    }
}

Answer 8

  public class QueueHandler
{
 //winstead of Queue<Object> will replace  BlockingQueue <String> queue = new LinkedBlockingQueue <> ();
public static Queue<Object> readQ = new Queue<Object>(100);

public static void enqueue(Object object)
{
  
    readQ.add(object);
}

public static Object dequeue()
{
   
    return readQ.get();
}
}

When

public static BlockingQueue <String> queue = new LinkedBlockingQueue <> (); 

it is static it works, but when it is non-static it doesn't work properly. How to fix it?