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 593379
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T15:50:23+00:00 2026-05-13T15:50:23+00:00

This question relates to a very specific and common scenario in which a dictionary

  • 0

This question relates to a very specific and common scenario in which a dictionary is being used for on-demand caching of items in a multi-threaded environment. To avoid thread locking it’s preferable to test for an existing cache item outside of a sync lock, but if we subsequently have to add an item then that counts as a write to the dictionary and therefore most advice I’ve been reading on stackoverflow is that you need to lock on the read as well as the write because the dictionary’s internal state might be being altered by the calls to add().

However, looking through Microsoft’s AjaxControlToolkit (scriptObjectBuilder class) the code does in fact perform TryGet() outside of any locks and only locks to Add() new items to the dictionary. I can see how this might be possible if the bucket that an item is placed into never changes once added, but my suspicion is that this is wrong and might be a source of bugs.

Thanks.

UPDATE
Going by the .Net documentation I think that the described pattern is indeed wrong. However I was wondering if the particular implementation of Dictionary allows it and that the AjaxControlToolkit was relying on this (which would be dubious). On examining the code in Reflector I’m pretty sure that this is indeed wrong, the Dictionary.Resize() method reallocates the number of buckets and moves bucket items around, so any thread in the middle of a TryGet() could potentially be working on unstable data.

UPDATE
A defect was already logged against the AjaxControlToolkit on codeplex. See:

  • Possible Thread Safety bug in ScriptObjectBuilder
  • Thread safety issue in ScriptObjectBuilder.
  • 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
    2026-05-13T15:50:23+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 3:50 pm

    To answer my own question following some investingation: On examining the code for Dictionary I can see that the Dictionary.Resize() method reallocates the number of internal buckets that are used for storing data, and redistributes the bucket contents so that items are in the correct bucket based on their hashcode. As such any thread in the middle of a TryGet() risks working on unstable data.

    As an aside, a possible low-locking approach for a Dictionary class might be to place a lock arounf just the Resize() method.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

This question relates to this question which I asked earlier this week. The answer
This question relates to those parts of the KenKen Latin Square puzzles which ask
I'm very sorry about this being a very cliché question, but I really need
This is a very general question that's not related to a specific language. I'm
Important : Please see this very much related question: Return multiple values in C++
Very much related to my previous question , but I found this to be
This question relates to my answer of another of my question. The original question
James here. This question relates (sort of) to the one I posted a little
This question most closely relates to the asp.net mvc3 framework. It started out as
This relates to my other question on accessing a REST service that uses forms

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.