Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7168143
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 28, 20262026-05-28T14:43:12+00:00 2026-05-28T14:43:12+00:00

I have a single thread producer which creates some task objects which are then

  • 0

I have a single thread producer which creates some task objects which are then added into an ArrayBlockingQueue (which is of fixed size).

I also start a multi-threaded consumer. This is build as a fixed thread pool (Executors.newFixedThreadPool(threadCount);). I then submit some ConsumerWorker intances to this threadPool, each ConsumerWorker having a refference to the above mentioned ArrayBlockingQueue instance.

Each such Worker will do a take() on the queue and deal with the task.

My issue is, what’s the best way to have a Worker know when there won’t be any more work to be done. In other words, how do I tell the Workers that the producer has finished adding to the queue, and from this point on, each worker should stop when he sees that the Queue is empty.

What I’ve got now is a setup where my Producer is initialized with a callback which is triggered when he finishes it’s job (of adding stuff to the queue). I also keep a list of all the ConsumerWorkers I’ve created and submitted to the ThreadPool. When the Producer Callback tells me that the producer is done, I can tell this to each of the workers. At this point they should simply keep checking if the queue is not empty, and when it becomes empty they should stop, thus allowing me to gracefully shutDown the ExecutorService thread pool. It’s something like this

public class ConsumerWorker implements Runnable{

private BlockingQueue<Produced> inputQueue;
private volatile boolean isRunning = true;

public ConsumerWorker(BlockingQueue<Produced> inputQueue) {
    this.inputQueue = inputQueue;
}

@Override
public void run() {
    //worker loop keeps taking en element from the queue as long as the producer is still running or as 
    //long as the queue is not empty:
    while(isRunning || !inputQueue.isEmpty()) {
        System.out.println("Consumer "+Thread.currentThread().getName()+" START");
        try {
            Object queueElement = inputQueue.take();
            //process queueElement
        } catch (Exception e) {
            e.printStackTrace();
        }
    }
}

//this is used to signal from the main thread that he producer has finished adding stuff to the queue
public void setRunning(boolean isRunning) {
    this.isRunning = isRunning;
}

}

The problem here is that I have an obvious race condition where sometimes the producer will finish, signal it, and the ConsumerWorkers will stop BEFORE consuming everything in the queue.

My question is what’s the best way to synchronize this so that it all works ok? Should I synchronize the whole part where it checks if the producer is running plus if the queue is empty plus take something from the queue in one block (on the queue object)? Should I just synchronize the update of the isRunning boolean on the ConsumerWorker instance? Any other suggestion?

UPDATE, HERE’S THE WORKING IMPLEMENTATION THAT I’VE ENDED UP USING:

public class ConsumerWorker implements Runnable{

private BlockingQueue<Produced> inputQueue;

private final static Produced POISON = new Produced(-1); 

public ConsumerWorker(BlockingQueue<Produced> inputQueue) {
    this.inputQueue = inputQueue;
}

@Override
public void run() {
    //worker loop keeps taking en element from the queue as long as the producer is still running or as 
    //long as the queue is not empty:
    while(true) {
        System.out.println("Consumer "+Thread.currentThread().getName()+" START");
        try {
            Produced queueElement = inputQueue.take();
            Thread.sleep(new Random().nextInt(100));
            if(queueElement==POISON) {
                break;
            }
            //process queueElement
        } catch (Exception e) {
            e.printStackTrace();
        }
        System.out.println("Consumer "+Thread.currentThread().getName()+" END");
    }
}

//this is used to signal from the main thread that he producer has finished adding stuff to the queue
public void stopRunning() {
    try {
        inputQueue.put(POISON);
    } catch (InterruptedException e) {
        // TODO Auto-generated catch block
        e.printStackTrace();
    }
}

}

This was inspired heavily by JohnVint’s answer below, with only some minor modifications.

=== Update due to @vendhan’s comment.

Thank you for your obeservation. You are right, the first snippet of code in this question has (amongst other issues) the one where the while(isRunning || !inputQueue.isEmpty()) doesn’t really make sense.

In my actual final implementation of this, I do something which is closer to your suggestion of replacing “||” (or) with “&&” (and), in the sense that each worker (consumer) now only checks if the element he’s got from the list is a poison pill, and if so stops (so theoretically we can say that the worker has to be running AND the queue must not be empty).

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-28T14:43:12+00:00Added an answer on May 28, 2026 at 2:43 pm

    You should continue to take() from the queue. You can use a poison pill to tell the worker to stop. For example:

    private final Object POISON_PILL = new Object();
    
    @Override
    public void run() {
        //worker loop keeps taking en element from the queue as long as the producer is still running or as 
        //long as the queue is not empty:
        while(isRunning) {
            System.out.println("Consumer "+Thread.currentThread().getName()+" START");
            try {
                Object queueElement = inputQueue.take();
                if(queueElement == POISON_PILL) {
                     inputQueue.add(POISON_PILL);//notify other threads to stop
                     return;
                }
                //process queueElement
            } catch (Exception e) {
                e.printStackTrace();
            }
        }
    }
    
    //this is used to signal from the main thread that he producer has finished adding stuff to the queue
    public void finish() {
        //you can also clear here if you wanted
        isRunning = false;
        inputQueue.add(POISON_PILL);
    }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have some project where I have a single producer thread which writes events
I have a single entry output from a paradox table which is imported into
I have a single NSDictionary object which contains a large number of custom objects.
I have an object Producer which internally starts a thread that will listen for
I have a some computation program. Now, this program is a single-thread, I need
I have a single-thread version of the merge sort http://pastebin.com/2uMGjTxr It creates an array,
I have a single xml file and every new thread of the program (BHO)
We have a Single Statement FUNCTION in SQL Server 2005 which uses CONTAINSTABLE(). All
I have single-thread windows form application written with VB.NET and targeting Framework 1.1 .
I have a single thread trying to connect to a database using JDBCTemplate as

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.