Singleton class is quite common among Java developers, but it poses many challenges to junior developers. One of the key challenge they face is how to keep Singleton class as Singleton? i.e. how to prevent multiple instances of a Singleton due to whatever reasons. Double checked locking of Singleton is a way to ensure only one instance of Singleton class is created through application life cycle. As name suggests, in double checked locking, code checks for an existing instance of Singleton class twice with and without locking to double ensure that no more than one instance of singleton gets created. By the way, it was broken before Java fixed its memory models issues in JDK 1.5. In this article, we will see how to write code for double checked locking of Singleton in Java, why double checked locking was broken before Java 5 and How that was fixed. By the way this is also important from interview point of view, I have heard it’s been asked to code double checked locking of Singleton by hand on companies in both financial and service sector, and believe me it’s tricky, until you have clear understanding of what you are doing. You can also see my full list of Singleton design pattern questions to prepare well.
Why you need Double checked Locking of Singleton Class?
One of the common scenario, where a Singleton class breaks its contracts is multi-threading. If you ask a beginner to write code for Singleton design pattern, there is good chance that he will come up with something like below :
private static Singleton _instance;
public static Singleton getInstance() {
if (_instance == null) {
_instance = new Singleton();
}
return _instance;
}and when you point out that this code will create multiple instances of Singleton class if called by more than one thread parallel, he would probably make this whole getInstance() method synchronized, as shown in our 2nd code example getInstanceTS() method. Though it’s a thread-safe and solves issue of multiple instance, it’s not very efficient. You need to bear cost of synchronization all the time you call this method, while synchronization is only needed on first class, when Singleton instance is created. This will bring us to double checked locking pattern, where only critical section of code is locked. Programmer call it double checked locking because there are two checks for _instance == null, one without locking and other with locking (inside synchronized) block. Here is how double checked locking looks like in Java :
public static Singleton getInstanceDC() {
if (_instance == null) { // Single Checked
synchronized (Singleton.class) {
if (_instance == null) { // Double checked
_instance = new Singleton();
}
}
}
return _instance;
}
On surface this method looks perfect, as you only need to pay price for synchronized block one time, but it still broken, until you make _instance variable volatile. Without volatile modifier it’s possible for another thread in Java to see half initialized state of _instance variable, but with volatile variable guaranteeing happens-before relationship, all the write will happen on volatile _instance before any read of _instance variable. This was not the case prior to Java 5, and that’s why double checked locking was broken before. Now, with happens-before guarantee, you can safely assume that this will work. By the way this is not the best way to create thread-safe Singleton, you can use Enum as Singleton, which provides inbuilt thread-safety during instance creation. Another way is to use static holder pattern.
/*
* A journey to write double checked locking of Singleton class in Java.
*/
class Singleton {
private volatile static Singleton _instance;
private Singleton() {
// preventing Singleton object instantiation from outside
}
/*
* 1st version: creates multiple instance if two thread access
* this method simultaneously
*/
public static Singleton getInstance() {
if (_instance == null) {
_instance = new Singleton();
}
return _instance;
}
/*
* 2nd version : this definitely thread-safe and only
* creates one instance of Singleton on concurrent environment
* but unnecessarily expensive due to cost of synchronization
* at every call.
*/
public static synchronized Singleton getInstanceTS() {
if (_instance == null) {
_instance = new Singleton();
}
return _instance;
}
/*
* 3rd version : An implementation of double checked locking of Singleton.
* Intention is to minimize cost of synchronization and improve performance,
* by only locking critical section of code, the code which creates
instance of Singleton class.
* By the way this is still broken, if we don't make _instance volatile,
as another thread can
* see a half initialized instance of Singleton.
*/
public static Singleton getInstanceDC() {
if (_instance == null) {
synchronized (Singleton.class) {
if (_instance == null) {
_instance = new Singleton();
}
}
}
return _instance;
}
}That’s all about double checked locking of Singleton class in Java. This is one of the controversial way to create thread-safe Singleton in Java, with simpler alternatives available in terms of using Enum as Singleton class. I don’t suggest you to implement your Singleton like that as there are many better way to implement Singleton pattern in Java. Though, this question has historical significance and also teaches how concurrency can introduce subtle bugs. As I said before, this is very important from interview point of view. Practice writing double checked locking of Singleton class by hand before going for any Java interview. This will develop your insight on coding mistakes made by Java programmers. On related note, In modern day of Test driven development, Singleton is regarded as anti pattern because of difficulty it present to mock its behaviour, so if you are TDD practitioner better avoid using Singleton pattern.
| Reference: | Double Checked Locking on Singleton Class in Java from our JCG partner Javin Paul at the Javarevisited blog. |
Interesting article. Based on what I’ve read so far, it seemed like this double checked locking needs to be used in tandem with volatile in order to avoid reading a partially constructed object. Enum as singleton seemed like a much easier way to create a singleton.
DCL is broken, read http://www.javaworld.com/article/2074979/java-concurrency/double-checked-locking–clever–but-broken.html