# Using synchronized still doesn't solve the "lost update" problem

Sandra Bachan

Ranch Hand

Posts: 434

posted 6 years ago

Reading Head First Java, 2nd Edition (0596009208), Chapter 15, pp 514. I adapted their code to include synchronized to solve the "lost update" problem:

I thought the output would increase, instead, it decreases (as shown in red), then increases:

Thanks!

I thought the output would increase, instead, it decreases (as shown in red), then increases:

`D:\JavaJava>java TestSyncTest`

balance is 1

balance is 3

balance is 4

balance is 5

balance is 6

balance is 7

balance is 8

balance is 9

balance is 2

balance is 11

balance is 12

balance is 13

balance is 14

balance is 15

balance is 16

balance is 17

balance is 18

balance is 19

balance is 20

balance is 21

balance is 22

balance is 10

balance is 24

balance is 25

balance is 26

balance is 27

balance is 28

balance is 29

balance is 30

balance is 31

balance is 32

balance is 33

balance is 34

balance is 35

balance is 36

balance is 37

balance is 38

balance is 39

balance is 40

balance is 41

balance is 42

balance is 43

balance is 44

balance is 45

balance is 46

balance is 47

balance is 48

balance is 49

balance is 50

balance is 51

balance is 52

balance is 53

balance is 54

balance is 55

balance is 56

balance is 57

balance is 58

balance is 59

balance is 60

balance is 61

balance is 62

balance is 63

balance is 64

balance is 23

balance is 65

balance is 66

balance is 67

balance is 68

balance is 69

balance is 70

balance is 71

balance is 72

balance is 73

balance is 74

balance is 75

balance is 76

balance is 77

balance is 78

balance is 79

balance is 80

balance is 81

balance is 82

balance is 83

balance is 84

balance is 85

balance is 86

balance is 87

balance is 88

balance is 89

balance is 90

balance is 91

balance is 92

balance is 93

balance is 94

balance is 95

balance is 96

balance is 97

balance is 98

balance is 99

balance is 100balance is 1

balance is 3

balance is 4

balance is 5

balance is 6

balance is 7

balance is 8

balance is 9

balance is 2

balance is 11

balance is 12

balance is 13

balance is 14

balance is 15

balance is 16

balance is 17

balance is 18

balance is 19

balance is 20

balance is 21

balance is 22

balance is 10

balance is 24

balance is 25

balance is 26

balance is 27

balance is 28

balance is 29

balance is 30

balance is 31

balance is 32

balance is 33

balance is 34

balance is 35

balance is 36

balance is 37

balance is 38

balance is 39

balance is 40

balance is 41

balance is 42

balance is 43

balance is 44

balance is 45

balance is 46

balance is 47

balance is 48

balance is 49

balance is 50

balance is 51

balance is 52

balance is 53

balance is 54

balance is 55

balance is 56

balance is 57

balance is 58

balance is 59

balance is 60

balance is 61

balance is 62

balance is 63

balance is 64

balance is 23

balance is 65

balance is 66

balance is 67

balance is 68

balance is 69

balance is 70

balance is 71

balance is 72

balance is 73

balance is 74

balance is 75

balance is 76

balance is 77

balance is 78

balance is 79

balance is 80

balance is 81

balance is 82

balance is 83

balance is 84

balance is 85

balance is 86

balance is 87

balance is 88

balance is 89

balance is 90

balance is 91

balance is 92

balance is 93

balance is 94

balance is 95

balance is 96

balance is 97

balance is 98

balance is 99

balance is 100

Thanks!

Marriage Made in Heaven

http://www.youtube.com/user/RohitWaliaWedsSonia

posted 6 years ago

Believe it or not, you did solve the "lost update" problem. If you really had a lost update, then the final value would not be 100.

What is happening is... There is no coordination between the two threads, in printing the results, so you are seeing the results being printed out of order.

Henry

Sandra Bachan wrote:Reading Head First Java, 2nd Edition (0596009208), Chapter 15, pp 514. I adapted their code to include synchronized to solve the "lost update" problem:

Believe it or not, you did solve the "lost update" problem. If you really had a lost update, then the final value would not be 100.

What is happening is... There is no coordination between the two threads, in printing the results, so you are seeing the results being printed out of order.

Henry

Sandra Bachan

Ranch Hand

Posts: 434

posted 6 years ago

Now I understand.

Modified the code such that it prints in order by placing print statement in the synchronized increment() method:

Modified the code such that it prints in order by placing print statement in the synchronized increment() method:

Marriage Made in Heaven

http://www.youtube.com/user/RohitWaliaWedsSonia

Sandra Bachan

Ranch Hand

Posts: 434

posted 6 years ago

@Abimaran : I ran the code, interesting output. Unless program specifies thread name, thread is named 0, and 1.....

Marriage Made in Heaven

http://www.youtube.com/user/RohitWaliaWedsSonia