We Keep Coding

Threads notifyAll() [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Java: notify() vs. notifyAll() all over again
(26 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
Given a thread has multiple states: alive runnable running waiting and terminated.
the notifyAll() method is suppose to put all threads that are "waiting" on an object's lock back into the "runnable" state where it is may be chosen as the next running object.
The following example instantiates and starts 3 Reader threads, which go into waiting (wait() method) until the 'calc' object's lock is released. The calc objects thread is instantiated and started just after this where it adds up some numbers, followed by notifyAll().
My question is, why doesn't the calc thread notify all the Reader threads every time? when I run this on my computer it's hit and miss.
public class Reader extends Thread{
Calculator c;
public Reader(Calculator calc){
c=calc;
}
public void run(){
synchronized(c){
try{
System.out.println("Waiting for calculation...");
c.wait();
}catch(InterruptedException e){}
System.out.println("Total is: "+c.total);
}
}
public static void main(String[] args){
Calculator calc = new Calculator();
new Reader(calc).start();
new Reader(calc).start();
new Reader(calc).start();
new Thread(calc).start();
}
}
class Calculator implements Runnable{
int total;
public void run(){
synchronized(this){
for(int i =0; i<100; i++){
total+=i;
}
notifyAll();
}
}
}

When executing multiple threads, order of execution of the threads is not guaranteed.
In your case chances are that the Calculator thread completes it's loop and calls notifyAll() even before any of the Reader threads gets into runnable state. So all Reader will keep waiting and will never print total.
To avoid such situation, in this particular example you can use another flag isCalculated in Calculator and set this flag once computation is done. Reader threads will also check for this flag and wait only when isCalculated is false.
class Reader extends Thread {
Calculator c;
public Reader(Calculator calc) {
c = calc;
}
public void run() {
synchronized (c) {
try {
System.out.println("Waiting for calculation...");
if (!c.isCalculated) { // wait only if calculation is not done
c.wait();
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
System.out.println("Total is: " + c.total);
}
}
}
class Calculator implements Runnable {
int total;
boolean isCalculated;
public void run() {
synchronized (this) {
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
total += i;
}
isCalculated = true; // set flag to mark that computation is complete
notifyAll();
}
}
}

As mentioned by #Sudhir you can check some flags before calling wait ,
check this tutorial: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/guardmeth.html
In your case notifyAll() may be called before wait is called .. so the threads may keep on waiting for the notify to be called

A simple wait() & notify() example - doesn't work

I tries to write a simple example that demonstrates a remote controller opertation.
The input is being accepted via the console, and a message is being printed accordingly.
Both threads run infinite loops: the main thread waits for notification, while the other waits for a console input.
I'd like to know how to fix it. The problem is that the notify doesn't stop the waiting: in other words, the words "before wait" are printed, but the words "after wait" are not. BTW, without the while(true) loops it works fine (for one button press).
Many thanks
public class MainTV {
public static int lastRemoteCode = 0;
public static void main(String[] args){
RemoteControllerThread remote = new RemoteControllerThread();
remote.start();
synchronized(remote){
while(true){
try {
System.out.println("before wait");
remote.wait();
System.out.println("after wait");
switch (lastRemoteCode){ //we use switch because there are many code options
case 0:
System.out.println("Error with remote button reading");
break;
case 3:
System.out.println("Volume Down button was pressed now!");
break;
case 4:
System.out.println("Volume Up button was pressed now!");
break;
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
}
and the second class (simulates the remote controller):
import java.util.Scanner;
public class RemoteControllerThread extends Thread{
public void run(){
synchronized(this){
Scanner in = new Scanner(System.in);
while(true){
System.out.println("Press a button in the remote please...");
int code = in.nextInt();
MainTV.lastRemoteCode = code;
System.out.println("before notify");
notify();
System.out.println("after notify");
}
}
}
}

Both threads synchronize on the same object, this refers to the same object as remote and since both this synchronize blocks have infinite loops inside, this creates a problem. One of the thread will wait for the other one to finish, which never happens (because of the infinite loops).
To fix this, you should synchronize only the code that needs to be synchronized, like the wait() and notify() calls.

I think there are two problems with your code.
When the main thread execution reaches synchronized(remote) it might not continue because the remote controller thread (possibly) already locked the remote object. Move remote.start() into synchronized(remote) block.
In order to let execution continue from wait you need to release the object lock after notify. Change syncronization block in thread like:
-
public void run() {
Scanner in = new Scanner(System.in);
while(true){
System.out.println("Press a button in the remote please...");
int code = in.nextInt();
MainTV.lastRemoteCode = code;
System.out.println("before notify");
synchronized(this) {
notify();
}
System.out.println("after notify");
}
}

To quote from notify() JavaDoc:
The awakened thread will not be able to proceed until the current thread relinquishes the lock on this object
Your remote never lets go of the lock. If you switch the synchronized with the while, you have a slim chance, but usually you remote will get the lock back immediately. The following works, for instance:
class RemoteControllerThread extends Thread {
public void run() {
while (true) {
synchronized (this) {
Scanner in = new Scanner(System.in);
System.out.println("Press a button in the remote please...");
int code = in.nextInt();
MainTV.lastRemoteCode = code;
System.out.println("before notify");
notify();
System.out.println("after notify");
}
try {
Thread.sleep(5);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}

Last thread is not executing

I am very new to multithreading, was trying a scenario in which a home has a mother(as producer),son,daughter and husband[As consumer] thread.I am trying to understand how wait and notify method can help here.
My classes are as below.
MotherAsProducer
package com.test.All.Threads;
public enum MotherAsProducer {
INSTANCE;
/*
*
*
* son Give request to prepare chapati to mother
* mother accepts it and start preparing , son/husband/daughter should wait by that time.
* mother notifies son/daughtor/husband that chapati is ready start consuming
* */
public synchronized void takeOrderAndMakeChapati(){
try {
System.out.println("Request got from "+Thread.currentThread().getName());
getStatusOfChapati();
wait();
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName()+" ate chapati");
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
//lock re-entrance
public synchronized void getStatusOfChapati(){
try {
Thread.sleep(1200);
System.out.println("Chapati is prepared for "+Thread.currentThread().getName());
notifyAll();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
public static MotherAsProducer getMotherInstance(){
return MotherAsProducer.INSTANCE;
}
}
SonAsConsumer class
package com.test.All.Threads;
public class SonAsConsumer implements Runnable{
public void run(){
MotherAsProducer.getMotherInstance().takeOrderAndMakeChapati();
}
}
DaughterAsConsumer class
package com.test.All.Threads;
public class DaughterAsConsumer implements Runnable {
public void run(){
MotherAsProducer.getMotherInstance().takeOrderAndMakeChapati();
}
}
HusbandAsConsumer class
package com.test.All.Threads;
public class HusbandAsConsumer implements Runnable {
public void run(){
MotherAsProducer.getMotherInstance().takeOrderAndMakeChapati();
}
}
Home class
package com.test.All.Threads;
public class Home {
public static void main(String args[]){
SonAsConsumer sac = new SonAsConsumer();
DaughterAsConsumer dac = new DaughterAsConsumer();
HusbandAsConsumer hac = new HusbandAsConsumer();
Thread tsac = new Thread(sac);
tsac.setName("Son");
Thread tdac = new Thread(dac);
tdac.setName("Daughter");
Thread thac = new Thread(hac);
thac.setName("Husband");
tsac.start();
tdac.start();
thac.start();
}
}
My output is different, every time as expected by nature of thread but one of the individual either husband, daughtor or son is not getting complete.
one instance of my output is as below.
Order she got from Daughter
Chapati is prepared for Daughter
Order she got from Son
Chapati is prepared for Son
Order she got from Husband
Chapati is prepared for Husband
Son ate chapati
Daughter ate chapati
My understanding here is when son,daughter and husband will start executing one of them will hit the synchronized method and execute wait() and will hold the lock , from that synchronized method again another synchronized method is called which will contain notify and the lock will be released and another thread will try to get the lock from the blocked pool and will execute in the same manner . here two threads are behaving as expected but the last one is not.
Kindly help here.

Briefly looking, it looks like the last thread to get to the wait will never get notified. Sequencing your calls you have each thread getting a lock, notifying all waiting threads, and then waiting. So, the last thread that hits the wait will never have anyone to notify them that they need to exit.
That is, if Thread A gets the lock initially, then it will do a println and a sleep then a println, then notify all waiting threads (there are none), and then become a waiting thread.
Then, lets say Thread B gets the lock. It will do a println and a sleep, then it will notify all (which will "notify" Thread A), then it will wait.
Now, either Thread C or Thread A will get the lock. If Thread A gets it, it will simply fall through and complete with the "ate" message. Then, Thread C can get the lock and it will eventually notify, waking B which can eat once C "waits". Now, there is no thread left to notify so that C will complete.
This make sense? Did I misread anything?
To verify what I'm suggesting is wrong, simply add in more threads. You should always have the last one that prints "Chapati is prepared for ..." will never eat it.
Fundamentally, I think the confusion is that "Mother" is not actually doing any work. What you probably wanted is to have "Mother" be a thread that has its own work log. So, when one of the other threads gives her work, you set a variable then notify mother and wait as the sibling. The mother will then wake up and do the work and notify the current thread waiting.
See what I mean? Metaphorically, you have 4 people in this program. But, you only have 3 threads.

Change the method in the enum class MotherAsProducer as follows: The unnecessary wait() method caused the issue. Since the method is synchronized, all other threads will be blocked before entering into the method until getting a notification from lock holding thread.
public synchronized void takeOrderAndMakeChapati() {
System.out.println("Request got from " + Thread.currentThread().getName());
getStatusOfChapati();
// wait(); - THIS WAIT IS CAUSING THE PROBLEM
System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " ate chapati");
}

Remove wait and notifyAll calls from both takeOrderAndMakeChapati and getStatusOfChapati. You will get the expected result.
As precisely mentioned by Josh, one of the threads (last one) is still waiting for some external notification, and there is nobody to notify. You code is still running in the background. Just call wait(5000) and you can see it happening.
Both methods takeOrderAndMakeChapati and getStatusOfChapati are synchronized, therefore synchronization is not the issue.
Generally threads wait for some external dependency or condition, where some other thread(s) notifies the waiting one, when that condition is fulfilled.

I also tried to understand wait and notify when I started with multithreading. But as soon as I learned to use a Semaphore, I never looked back. Hopefully, the example below will give you some insight into the benefits of using a Semaphore. There is also a lot more useful stuff in the java.util.concurrent package that can be of great help.
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService;
import java.util.concurrent.Executors;
import java.util.concurrent.Semaphore;
import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;
import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger;
public class EatChapati {
static int CHAPATI_PREPARE_TIME_MS = 100;
static long RUN_TIME_MS = 2000;
static long SHUTDOWN_TIME_MS = 500;
static int CHAPATI_CONSUMERS = 5;
static volatile boolean stop;
public static void main(String[] args) {
ExecutorService executor = Executors.newCachedThreadPool();
for (int i = 0; i < CHAPATI_CONSUMERS; i++) {
executor.execute(new ChapatiConsumer(i + 1));
}
try { Thread.sleep(RUN_TIME_MS); } catch (Exception ignored) {}
stop = true;
executor.shutdownNow();
try { executor.awaitTermination(SHUTDOWN_TIME_MS, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS); } catch (Exception ignored) {}
}
// 1 producer making chapati's
// 'true' for a fair semaphore: longest waiting consumer gets served
static Semaphore chapatiTurn = new Semaphore(1, true);
static AtomicInteger chapatiCount = new AtomicInteger();
static int getChapati(int consumerNumber) {
int chapatiNumber = 0;
boolean haveTurn = false;
try {
chapatiTurn.acquire();
// start of 'synchronized' block
haveTurn = true;
Thread.sleep(CHAPATI_PREPARE_TIME_MS);
chapatiNumber = chapatiCount.incrementAndGet();
System.out.println("Chapati " + chapatiNumber + " prepared for consumer " + consumerNumber);
} catch (Exception e) {
// Triggered by executor.shutdownNow
stop = true;
} finally {
if (haveTurn) {
chapatiTurn.release();
// end of 'synchronized' block
}
}
return chapatiNumber;
}
static class ChapatiConsumer implements Runnable {
int number;
ChapatiConsumer(int number) {
this.number = number;
}
public void run() {
int chapatisConsumed = 0;
while (!stop) {
if (getChapati(number) > 0) {
chapatisConsumed++;
}
}
System.out.println("Consumer " + number + " stopped after consuming " + chapatisConsumed + " chapatis.");
}
}
}

A good small example to demonstrate wait() and notify() method in java

Can anybody please provide me a good small example demonstrate wait() and notify() functionality in java. I've tried with the below piece of code but it's not showing what i expected.
public class WaitDemo {
int i = 10;
int display() {
System.out.println("Lexmark");
i++;
return i;
}
}
public class ClassDemo1 extends Thread {
private WaitDemo wd = new WaitDemo();
public static void main(String[] args) {
ClassDemo1 cd1 = new ClassDemo1();
ClassDemo1 cd2 = new ClassDemo1();
cd1.setName("Europe");
cd2.setName("America");
cd1.start();
cd2.start();
}
synchronized void display() {
System.out.println("Hello");
notifyAll();
}
public void run() {
synchronized (this) {
try {
{
notify();
System.out.println("The thread is " + currentThread().getName());
wait();
System.out.println("The value is " + wd.display());
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
}
}
}
The issue is that the method in the class WaitDemo is not getting executed and as per my idea the SOP after wait() should execute. Please help me out on this.

You've got two levels of braces { in your try block. If you remove the inner set (which doesn't appear to do anything), does that fix the problem?
There are several examples around, all of which demonstrate the use. The last link is a set of results that can help you out. If you need more specific things, let me know what it is that your app is trying to do, and I can try to find examples that are more specific to your situation.
http://www.javamex.com/tutorials/wait_notify_how_to.shtml
http://www.java-samples.com/showtutorial.php?tutorialid=306
http://www.coderanch.com/t/234235/threads/java/Wait-Example
https://www.google.com/search?q=wait%28%29+example+java&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Below is an example of wait & notify in the Object class. The customer is trying to withdraw money of value 2000 but the account is having only 1000 so it has to wait for the deposit. Once the deposit is made, then the customer will be able to withdraw the amount. Until the deposit is made, the customer will be waiting.
class Cust {
private int totalAmount = 1000;
public synchronized void withdrawal(int amount) {
System.out.println("Total amount " + totalAmount + " withdrawing amount " + amount);
while (this.totalAmount < amount) {
System.out.println("not enough amount..waiting for deposit..");
try { wait(); } catch (Exception e) {}
}
this.totalAmount -= amount;
System.out.println("Withdrawal successful.. Remaining balance is "+totalAmount);
}
public synchronized void deposit(int amount){
System.out.println("Depositing amount "+amount);
this.totalAmount += amount;
System.out.println("deposit completed...and Now totalAmount is " + this.totalAmount);
notify();
}
}
class Depo implements Runnable {
Cust c; int depo;
Depo(Cust c, int depo){
this.c = c;
this.depo = depo;
}
#Override
public void run() {
c.deposit(depo);
}
}
class Withdrawal implements Runnable {
Cust c; int with;
Withdrawal(Cust c, int with){
this.c = c;
this.with = with;
}
#Override
public void run() {
c.withdrawal(with);
}
}
public class ObjectWaitExample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Cust c = new Cust();
Thread w = new Thread(new Withdrawal(c, 2000));
Thread d1 = new Thread(new Depo(c, 50));
Thread d2 = new Thread(new Depo(c, 150));
Thread d3 = new Thread(new Depo(c, 900));
w.start();
d1.start();
d2.start();
d3.start();
}
}

I created two threads one for printing odd numbers (OddThread) and another for even numbers (EvenThread). Inside the run method of each of the threads I used the shared object of class Print to call printOdd() and printEven() for the Odd and EvenThread respectively. I made the shared object of Print static so that only one copy is made. Now synchronizing on the Print object I used a Boolean flag such that when the odd thread printed an odd number it will be sent into the waiting state and the at the same time notifying the even thread to execute. The logic is written in such a way that the odd thread will always print the odd number first no matter what, as the flag is set to false initially preventing the even thread to execute and sending it to a waiting state.
package com.amardeep.test;
public class ThreadDemo {
// Shared object
static Print print = new Print();
public static void main(String[] args) {
new Thread(new OddThread()).start();
new Thread(new EvenThread()).start();
}
}
class EvenThread implements Runnable {
#Override
public void run() {
ThreadDemo.print.printEven();
}
}
class OddThread implements Runnable {
#Override
public void run() {
ThreadDemo.print.printOdd();
}
}
class Print {
public volatile boolean flag = false;
public synchronized void printEven() {
for (int i = 1; i <= 10; i++) {
if (!flag) {
try {
wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
} else {
if (i % 2 == 0) {
System.out.println("from even " + i);
flag = false;
notifyAll();
}
}
}
}
public synchronized void printOdd() {
for (int i = 1; i <= 10; i++) {
if (flag) {
try {
wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
} else {
if (i % 2 != 0) {
System.out.println("from odd " + i);
flag = true;
notifyAll();
}
}
}
}
}
output:-
from odd 1
from even 2
from odd 3
from even 4
from odd 5
from even 6
from odd 7
from even 8
from odd 9
from even 10

Your problem is that you are creating two instances of the Thread class. Thus when the wait() is called, it is on two different instances, neither of which has another thread that is in contention for your monitor, nor is there another thread to call notifyAll() to wake the thread from its wait state.
Thus each thread you have started will wait forever (or until interrupted for some other reason).
You want to have multiple threads accessing the same monitor, so start by trying to code something in which the code in question is not actually a thread, but is simply being used by a thread.
#normalocity has already provided links to multiple examples.

I just updated this answer to include an SCCE.
The workers call pauseIfNeeded on the WorkerPauseManager. If the manager is paused when the worker thread calls pauseIfNeeded(), we call wait(), which tells the calling thread to wait until a different thread calls notify() or notifyAll() on the object being waited on. This happens when the Swing Event Dispatch Thread calls play() on the manager, which in turn calls notifyAll().
Note that you must have a synchronized lock on the object you are calling wait() or notify() on. Since the methods in WorkerPauseManager are synchronized, all the synchronized methods are getting a synchronized lock on the WorkerPauseManager itself.
import javax.swing.*;
import java.awt.event.ActionEvent;
/**
* #author sbarnum
*/
public class WorkerPauseManagerTest {
public static void main(String[] args) {
final WorkerPauseManager pauseManager = new WorkerPauseManager();
new Worker("Worker 1", pauseManager).start();
new Worker("Worker 2", pauseManager).start();
SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
JToggleButton playPauseButton = new JToggleButton(new AbstractAction("Pause") {
public void actionPerformed(final ActionEvent e) {
JToggleButton source = (JToggleButton) e.getSource();
if (source.isSelected()) {
pauseManager.start();
source.setText("Pause");
} else {
pauseManager.pause();
source.setText("Play");
}
}
});
playPauseButton.setSelected(true); // already running
JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(null, playPauseButton, "WorkerPauseManager Demo", JOptionPane.PLAIN_MESSAGE);
System.exit(0);
}
});
}
private static class Worker extends Thread {
final String name;
final WorkerPauseManager pauseManager;
public Worker(final String name, final WorkerPauseManager pauseManager) {
this.name = name;
this.pauseManager = pauseManager;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while (!Thread.interrupted()) {
try {
pauseManager.pauseIfNeeded();
System.out.println(name + " is running");
Thread.sleep(1000L);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
}
}
public static final class WorkerPauseManager {
private boolean paused;
public synchronized void pauseIfNeeded() throws InterruptedException {
if (paused) wait();
}
public synchronized void pause() {
this.paused = true;
}
public synchronized void start() {
this.paused = false;
notifyAll();
}
}
}

What wait method does is , when some thread executed a synchronized block by locking some object (we call that object is "a") , then inside that synchronized block when the thread executed the wait method of object "a" like this
A a = new A (); // some class object call "a"
synchronized (a){
a.wait ();//exceptions must be handled
}
Then the a object will release and the thread has to go to the wait state until it has been release from that state.
and anothet thread now can use the a object beacause its a release object. so if another thread locked that object and it executed the notify method from that object like
a.notify ()
Then one of a thread of the threads that went to wait state by object "a" can be released from the wait state. Other wise when call the notifyAll then the all the thread objects will release from that state.

/*
* the below program is like
* tread t1 will first run , and it comes to "notify()" method
* there are no threds waiting bcoz this is the first thread.
* so it will not invoke any other threads. next step is "wait()" method
*will be called and the thread t1 in waiting state. next stament
* "System.out.println("The value is ..."+wd.display());" will not be executed
* because thread t1 is in waiting state.
*
* thread t2 will run ,and it comes to "notify()" method ,there is already
* thread t1 is in waiting state ,then it will be invoked.now thread t1 will
* continue execution and it prints the statement "System.out.println("The value is ..."+wd.display())"
* and thread t2 will be in waiting state now.
*
* if you uncomment "notifyAll()" method then, after t1 thread completes its execution
*then immediately "notifyAll()" method will be called,by that time thread t2 is
* already in waiting state , then thread t2 will be invoked and continues execution.
*or
* if any other threadds are in waiting state all those threads will be invoked.
*/
package threadsex;
/**
*
* #author MaheshM
*/
/**
* #param args the command line arguments
*/
public class WaitNotifyNotifyAllDemo implements Runnable {
WaitDemo wd = new WaitDemo();
public static void main(String[] args) {
WaitNotifyNotifyAllDemo cd1 = new WaitNotifyNotifyAllDemo();
Thread t1 = new Thread(cd1);
t1.setName("mahi1");
Thread t2 = new Thread(cd1);
t2.setName("mahi2");
t1.start();
t2.start();
}
#Override
public void run() {
synchronized (this) {
try {
System.out.println("The thread is=" +
Thread.currentThread().getName());
notify();
wait();
System.out.println("The value is ..." + wd.display());
// notifyAll();
} catch (Exception ex) {
ex.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}

Java: Threads, how to make them all do something

I am trying to implement nodes talking to each other in Java. I am doing this by creating a new thread for every node that wants to talk to the server.
When the given number of nodes, i.e. that many threads have been created, have connected to the server I want each thread to execute their next bit of code after adding to the "sharedCounter".
I think I need to use 'locks' on the shared variable, and something like signalAll() or notifyAll() to get all the threads going, but I can't seem to make clear sense of exactly how this works or to implement it.
Any help explaining these Java concepts would be greatly appreciated :D
Below is roughly the structure of my code:
import java.net.*;
import java.io.*;
public class Node {
public static void main(String[] args) {
...
// Chooses server or client launchers depend on parameters.
...
}
}
class sharedResource {
private int sharedCounter;
public sharedResource(int i) {
sharedCounter = i;
}
public synchronized void incSharedCounter() {
sharedCounter--;
if (sharedCounter == 0)
// Get all threads to do something
}
}
class Server {
...
for (int i = 0; i < numberOfThreads; i++) {
new serverThread(serverSocket.accept()).start();
}
...
sharedResource threadCount = new sharedResource(numberOfThreads);
...
}
class serverThread extends Thread {
...
//some code
Server.threadCount.incSharedCounter();
// Some more code to run when sharedCounte == 0
...
}
class Client {
...
}

　　　　　// Get all threads to do something
Threads (or rather Runnables, which you should implement rather than extending Thread) have a run method that contains the code they are expected to execute.
Once you call Thread#start (which in turn calls Runnable#run), the thread will start doing exactly that.
Since you seem to be new to multi-threading in Java, I recommend that you read an introduction to the Concurrency Utility package, that has been introduced in Java5 to make it easier to implement concurrent operations.
Specifically what you seem to be looking for is a way to "pause" the operation until a condition is met (in your case a counter having reached zero). For this, you should look at a CountDownLatch.

Indeed, the subject is broad, but I'll try to explain the basics. More details can be read from various blogs and articles. One of which is the Java trail.
It is best to see each thread as being runners (physical persons) that run alongside each other in a race. Each runner may perform any task while running. For example, take a cup of water from a table at a given moment in the race. Physically, they cannot both drink from the same cup at once, but in the virtual world, it is possible (this is where the line is drawn).
For example, take again two runners; each of them has to run back and forth a track, and push a button (shared by the runners) at each end for 1'000'000 times, the button is simply incrementing a counter by one each time. When they completed their run, what would be the value of the counter? In the physical world, it would be 2'000'000 because the runners cannot push the button at the same time, they would wait for the first one to leave first... that is unless they fight over it... Well, this is exactly what two threads would do. Consider this code :
public class ThreadTest extends Thread {
static public final int TOTAL_INC = 1000000;
static public int counter = 0;
#Override
public void run() {
for (int i=0; i<TOTAL_INC; i++) {
counter++;
}
System.out.println("Thread stopped incrementing counter " + TOTAL_INC + " times");
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
Thread t1 = new ThreadTest();
Thread t2 = new ThreadTest();
t1.start();
t2.start();
t1.join(); // wait for each thread to stop on their own...
t2.join(); //
System.out.println("Final counter is : " + counter + " which should be equal to " + TOTAL_INC * 2);
}
}
An output could be something like
Thread stopped incrementing counter 1000000 times
Thread stopped incrementing counter 1000000 times
Final counter is : 1143470 which should be equal to 2000000
Once in a while, the two thread would just increment the same value twice; this is called a race condition.
Synchronizing the run method will not work, and you'd have to use some locking mechanism to prevent this from happening. Consider the following changes in the run method :
static private Object lock = new Object();
#Override
public void run() {
for (int i=0; i<TOTAL_INC; i++) {
synchronized(lock) {
counter++;
}
}
System.out.println("Thread stopped incrementing counter " + TOTAL_INC + " times");
}
Now the expected output is
...
Final counter is : 2000000 which should be equal to 2000000
We have synchronized our counter with a shared object. This is like putting a queue line before only one runner can access the button at once.
NOTE : this locking mechanism is called a mutex. If a resource can be accessed by n threads at once, you might consider using a semaphore.
Multithreading is also associated with deadlocking. A deadlock is when two threads mutually waits for the other to free some synchronized resource to continue. For example :
Thread 1 starts
Thread 2 starts
Thread 1 acquire synchronized object1
Thread 2 acquire synchronized object2
Thread 2 needs to acquire object2 for continuing (locked by Thread 1)
Thread 1 needs to acquire object1 for continuing (locked by Thread 2)
Program hangs in deadlock
While there are many ways to prevent this from happening (it depends on what your threads are doing, and how they are implemented...) You should read about that particularly.
NOTE : the methods wait, notify and notifyAll can only be called when an object is synchronized. For example :
static public final int TOTAL_INC = 10;
static private int counter = 0;
static private Object lock = new Object();
static class Thread1 extends Thread {
#Override
public void run() {
synchronized (lock) {
for (int i=0; i<TOTAL_INC; i++) {
try {
lock.wait();
counter++;
lock.notify();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
}
static class Thread2 extends Thread {
#Override
public void run() {
synchronized (lock) {
for (int i=0; i<TOTAL_INC; i++) {
try {
lock.notify();
counter--;
lock.wait();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
/* ignored */
}
}
}
}
}
Notice that both threads are running their for...loop blocks within the synchronized block. (The result of counter == 0 when both threads end.) This can be achieved because they "let each other" access the synchronized resource via the resource's wait and notify methods. Without using those two methods, both threads would simply run sequentially and not concurrently (or more precisely, alternately).
I hope this shed some light about threads (in Java).
** UPDATE **
Here is a little proof of concept of everything discussed above, using the CountDownLatch class suggested by Thilo earlier :
static class Server {
static public final int NODE_COUNT = 5;
private List<RunnableNode> nodes;
private CountDownLatch startSignal;
private Object lock = new Object();
public Server() {
nodes = Collections.synchronizedList(new ArrayList<RunnableNode>());
startSignal = new CountDownLatch(Server.NODE_COUNT);
}
public Object getLock() {
return lock;
}
public synchronized void connect(RunnableNode node) {
if (startSignal.getCount() > 0) {
startSignal.countDown();
nodes.add(node);
System.out.println("Received connection from node " + node.getId() + " (" + startSignal.getCount() + " remaining...)");
} else {
System.out.println("Client overflow! Refusing connection from node " + node.getId());
throw new IllegalStateException("Too many nodes connected");
}
}
public void shutdown() {
for (RunnableNode node : nodes) {
node.shutdown();
}
}
public void awaitAllConnections() {
try {
startSignal.await();
synchronized (lock) {
lock.notifyAll(); // awake all nodes
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
/* ignore */
shutdown(); // properly close any connected node now
}
}
}
static class RunnableNode implements Runnable {
private Server server;
private int id;
private boolean working;
public RunnableNode(int id, Server server) {
this.id = id;
this.server = server;
this.working = true;
}
public int getId() {
return id;
}
public void run() {
try {
Thread.sleep((long) (Math.random() * 5) * 1000); // just wait randomly from 0 to 5 seconds....
synchronized (server.getLock()) {
server.connect(this);
server.getLock().wait();
}
if (!Thread.currentThread().isAlive()) {
throw new InterruptedException();
} else {
System.out.println("Node " + id + " started successfully!");
while (working) {
Thread.yield();
}
}
} catch (InterruptedException e1) {
System.out.print("Ooop! ...");
} catch (IllegalStateException e2) {
System.out.print("Awwww! Too late! ...");
}
System.out.println("Node " + id + " is shutting down");
}
public void shutdown() {
working = false; // shutdown node here...
}
}
static public void main(String...args) throws InterruptedException {
Server server = new Server();
for (int i=0; i<Server.NODE_COUNT + 4; i++) { // create 4 more nodes than needed...
new Thread(new RunnableNode(i, server)).start();
}
server.awaitAllConnections();
System.out.println("All connection received! Server started!");
Thread.sleep(6000);
server.shutdown();
}

This is a broad topic. You might try reading through the official guides for concurrency (i.e. threading, more or less) in Java. This isn't something with cut-and-dried solutions; you have to design something.