#89 Race Condition in Java

[@xihadityajaiswal8797]

Point to point explanation no time waste

[@PR1V1LE6ED]

Thank you for all of your videos. You are a fantastic teacher.

[@aymanmouhcine5749]

Your analogy at the beginning helped me a lot to understand the concept. than you very much. I am watching the whole series.

[@MihulBhatt]

Best java series on the internet.

[@שוהםביטון-מ2כ]

Thank you very much for all your clear and understandable explanations, You demonstrate and detail in a particularly understandable way!

[@adhikaribinu7436]

Thanks for your video, i took a video in udemy, i just lost money, after discovering your videos :D I really love the simple way, you explained complex problem !

[@AhmedElsaadany-ey7ri]

The best explanation for race condition. keep going

[@jenilcaptain6295]

Underrated !

[@fahizkp4774]

Great explanation. Keep up the good work

[@RishiRaj-xj2zb]

Why when I try to execute by removing join of both the t1 and t2 , with sync method it prints count zero and if try to print the count by joining only one t1 and not t2 it comes near to 20000 not complete 20000?

[@바다-r2y]

Thanks a lot! It was really helpful.

[@Vzletnýracek]

thank you, awesome explanation!

[@ShermukhammadKarimov]

thanks for clear explanation

[@ShermukhammadKarimov]

thanks for the clear explanation one more time

[@yikechen1470]

ur my heroo love from a cs kid

[@mukulkarnwal14]

Please make a video for locks and semaphores.

[@nerdium9705]

can volatile keyword used in this stuation instead of scynchronize? (int volatile count;)

[@kalashjain3769]

Hello Sir , Very nice and beutiful explanation . Just a small thing regarding the code , that in my System I am always getting correct value without using synchronize keyword . So I can't visualize the race condition . Do you have any explanation about it . Thanks

[@srikanthambati8976]

@Kalashjain.. I too get correct value with out using synchronize but it works for small iteration.. If we take more iterations like "2000" then it will give different value.

[@rachel5628]

This is because the computation is simple and fast, and there is no thread switch that happens exactly at the critical section. Race condition may only show up in 1 in many times the program is run(depending on the complexity of ur program and num of threads) Add thread.sleep(1000ms) or very long for loop or some other artificial delay in your program to increase likelihood of thread switch and make the race condition obvious.

[@evitaemort]

amazing thank you!

[@srikanthambati8976]

Instead of synchronized we can use setpriority to any of the thread to avoid conflicts.. This block of code works for me ## T1.setPriority(Thread.MAX_PRIORITY); T1.start(); T1.sleep(5); // sleep condition T2.start();

[@sudhirthakur4035]

we cant use priority instead of sychronized because priority() doesnt support windows and give mixed output for same code whereas synchronized maintains no data inconsistency and thread interference .

[@maleeshasandakalum6213]

Thank you sir❤❤

[@ayushisingh6638]

what is the use of volatile?

[@ragavir2601]

I am getting error as "Error: Could not find or load main class mythread", when i try executing the code

[@rockingstars4121]

sir is there any logical mistake in my code : class rider{ int count;// as it is an instance variable so it is by default zero public synchronized void increment(){ count++; } } class A extends rider implements Runnable{ public void run(){ for(int i=1;i{ for(int i=1;i

[@NahiRahman-jr3cs]

i am getting 19998 instead of 20000 even with the synchronized implementation, can you tell me why?

[@NaveenKumar-hy5et]

class Counter{ int count; public void increment(){ count++; } } public class Main { public static void main(String args[]) { Counter c = new Counter(); Runnable call = () -> { for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) { c.increment(); } }; Runnable call2 = () -> { for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) { c.increment(); } }; Thread t1 = new Thread(call); Thread t2 = new Thread(call2); t1.start(); t2.start(); System.out.println(c.count); } } why am i getting (0)

[@aszaw5342]

Because java printing c.count when was 0 and before any thread tasks

[@yogeshwaran7443]

I also get 0😅 then i am using sleep for 10000ms before print count Then get 2000 as output

[@userre85]

You forgot to join t1 & t2.

[@shadrackssenkaayi]

what do you mean@@userre85

[@aninditadas7348]

Please use join. I did get 0 previously

[@abhinay.k]

Thank you sir

[@deepaksharma5831]

my vs code give 0 oputput

[@aninditadas7348]

Please use join. I did get 0 previously

[@mansoor8228]

Wow

[@srivishwap6107]

I get 0 as output ??

[@amanali9501]

join the threads t1.join(); t2.join();

[@aninditadas7348]

Please use join. I did get 0 previously

[@saif1247]

im getting 2002

[@RishiRaj-xj2zb]

🤣

[@Progamer-fq8st]

You must have initialized for loop from 0 to 1000