Java – Timer & TimerTask versus Thread + sleep in Java

javasleeptasktimerwhile-loop

I found similar questions asked here but there weren't answers to my satisfaction. So rephrasing the question again-

I have a task that needs to be done on a periodic basis (say 1 minute intervals). What is advantage of using Timertask & Timer to do this as opposed to creating a new thread that has a infinite loop with sleep?

Code snippet using timertask-

TimerTask uploadCheckerTimerTask = new TimerTask(){

 public void run() {
  NewUploadServer.getInstance().checkAndUploadFiles();
 }
};

Timer uploadCheckerTimer = new Timer(true);
uploadCheckerTimer.scheduleAtFixedRate(uploadCheckerTimerTask, 0, 60 * 1000);

Code snippet using Thread and sleep-

Thread t = new Thread(){
 public void run() {
  while(true) {
   NewUploadServer.getInstance().checkAndUploadFiles();
   Thread.sleep(60 * 1000);
  }
 }
};
t.start();

I really don't have to worry if I miss certain cycles if the execution of the logic takes more than the interval time.

Please comment on this..

Update:
Recently I found another difference between using Timer versus Thread.sleep(). Suppose the current system time is 11:00AM. If we rollback the system time to 10:00AM for some reason, The Timer will STOP executing the task until it has reached 11:00AM, whereas Thread.sleep() method would continue executing the task without hindrance. This can be a major decision maker in deciding what to use between these two.

Best Answer

The advantage of TimerTask is that it expresses your intention much better (i.e. code readability), and it already has the cancel() feature implemented.

Note that it can be written in a shorter form as well as your own example:

Timer uploadCheckerTimer = new Timer(true);
uploadCheckerTimer.scheduleAtFixedRate(
    new TimerTask() {
      public void run() { NewUploadServer.getInstance().checkAndUploadFiles(); }
    }, 0, 60 * 1000);

Related Solutions

Java – What are the differences between a HashMap and a Hashtable in Java

There are several differences between HashMap and Hashtable in Java:

Hashtable is synchronized, whereas HashMap is not. This makes HashMap better for non-threaded applications, as unsynchronized Objects typically perform better than synchronized ones.
Hashtable does not allow null keys or values. HashMap allows one null key and any number of null values.
One of HashMap's subclasses is LinkedHashMap, so in the event that you'd want predictable iteration order (which is insertion order by default), you could easily swap out the HashMap for a LinkedHashMap. This wouldn't be as easy if you were using Hashtable.

Since synchronization is not an issue for you, I'd recommend HashMap. If synchronization becomes an issue, you may also look at ConcurrentHashMap.

Java – Is Java “pass-by-reference” or “pass-by-value”

Java is always pass-by-value. Unfortunately, when we deal with objects we are really dealing with object-handles called references which are passed-by-value as well. This terminology and semantics easily confuse many beginners.

It goes like this:

public static void main(String[] args) {
    Dog aDog = new Dog("Max");
    Dog oldDog = aDog;

    // we pass the object to foo
    foo(aDog);
    // aDog variable is still pointing to the "Max" dog when foo(...) returns
    aDog.getName().equals("Max"); // true
    aDog.getName().equals("Fifi"); // false
    aDog == oldDog; // true
}

public static void foo(Dog d) {
    d.getName().equals("Max"); // true
    // change d inside of foo() to point to a new Dog instance "Fifi"
    d = new Dog("Fifi");
    d.getName().equals("Fifi"); // true
}

In the example above aDog.getName() will still return "Max". The value aDog within main is not changed in the function foo with the Dog "Fifi" as the object reference is passed by value. If it were passed by reference, then the aDog.getName() in main would return "Fifi" after the call to foo.

Likewise:

public static void main(String[] args) {
    Dog aDog = new Dog("Max");
    Dog oldDog = aDog;

    foo(aDog);
    // when foo(...) returns, the name of the dog has been changed to "Fifi"
    aDog.getName().equals("Fifi"); // true
    // but it is still the same dog:
    aDog == oldDog; // true
}

public static void foo(Dog d) {
    d.getName().equals("Max"); // true
    // this changes the name of d to be "Fifi"
    d.setName("Fifi");
}

In the above example, Fifi is the dog's name after call to foo(aDog) because the object's name was set inside of foo(...). Any operations that foo performs on d are such that, for all practical purposes, they are performed on aDog, but it is not possible to change the value of the variable aDog itself.

For more information on pass by reference and pass by value, consult the following SO answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/430958/6005228. This explains more thoroughly the semantics and history behind the two and also explains why Java and many other modern languages appear to do both in certain cases.

Best Answer

Related Solutions

Java – What are the differences between a HashMap and a Hashtable in Java

Java – Is Java “pass-by-reference” or “pass-by-value”

Related Topic