001/* 002 * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more 003 * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with 004 * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. 005 * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 006 * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with 007 * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at 008 * 009 * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 010 * 011 * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software 012 * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, 013 * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. 014 * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and 015 * limitations under the License. 016 */ 017package org.apache.commons.lang3.concurrent; 018 019import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicReference; 020 021/** 022 * <p> 023 * A specialized {@code ConcurrentInitializer} implementation which is similar 024 * to {@link AtomicInitializer}, but ensures that the {@link #initialize()} 025 * method is called only once. 026 * </p> 027 * <p> 028 * As {@link AtomicInitializer} this class is based on atomic variables, so it 029 * can create an object under concurrent access without synchronization. 030 * However, it implements an additional check to guarantee that the 031 * {@link #initialize()} method which actually creates the object cannot be 032 * called multiple times. 033 * </p> 034 * <p> 035 * Because of this additional check this implementation is slightly less 036 * efficient than {@link AtomicInitializer}, but if the object creation in the 037 * {@code initialize()} method is expensive or if multiple invocations of 038 * {@code initialize()} are problematic, it is the better alternative. 039 * </p> 040 * <p> 041 * From its semantics this class has the same properties as 042 * {@link LazyInitializer}. It is a "save" implementation of the lazy 043 * initializer pattern. Comparing both classes in terms of efficiency is 044 * difficult because which one is faster depends on multiple factors. Because 045 * {@code AtomicSafeInitializer} does not use synchronization at all it probably 046 * outruns {@link LazyInitializer}, at least under low or moderate concurrent 047 * access. Developers should run their own benchmarks on the expected target 048 * platform to decide which implementation is suitable for their specific use 049 * case. 050 * </p> 051 * 052 * @since 3.0 053 * @param <T> the type of the object managed by this initializer class 054 */ 055public abstract class AtomicSafeInitializer<T> implements 056 ConcurrentInitializer<T> { 057 /** A guard which ensures that initialize() is called only once. */ 058 private final AtomicReference<AtomicSafeInitializer<T>> factory = 059 new AtomicReference<>(); 060 061 /** Holds the reference to the managed object. */ 062 private final AtomicReference<T> reference = new AtomicReference<>(); 063 064 /** 065 * Gets (and initialize, if not initialized yet) the required object 066 * 067 * @return lazily initialized object 068 * @throws ConcurrentException if the initialization of the object causes an 069 * exception 070 */ 071 @Override 072 public final T get() throws ConcurrentException { 073 T result; 074 075 while ((result = reference.get()) == null) { 076 if (factory.compareAndSet(null, this)) { 077 reference.set(initialize()); 078 } 079 } 080 081 return result; 082 } 083 084 /** 085 * Creates and initializes the object managed by this 086 * {@code AtomicInitializer}. This method is called by {@link #get()} when 087 * the managed object is not available yet. An implementation can focus on 088 * the creation of the object. No synchronization is needed, as this is 089 * already handled by {@code get()}. This method is guaranteed to be called 090 * only once. 091 * 092 * @return the managed data object 093 * @throws ConcurrentException if an error occurs during object creation 094 */ 095 protected abstract T initialize() throws ConcurrentException; 096}