Proof of library bug vs developer side application bug

I have a problem with a specific java client library. Here is the situation:

I have made a program that uses the library. The program is a class named 'WorkerThread' that extends Thread. To start it I have made a Main class that only contains a main() function that starts the thread and nothing else. The worker uses the library to perform comm with a server and get results. The problem appears when I want to run 2 WorkerThreads simultaneously. What I first did was to do this in the Main class:

public class Main
{
   public static void main(String args[])
   {
      new WorkerThread().start(); // 1st thread.
      new WorkerThread().start(); // 2nd thread.
   }
} 

When I run this, both threads produce irrational results and what is more , some results that should be received by 1st thread are received by the 2nd instead.

If instead of the above, I just run 2 separate processes of one thread each, then everything works fine.

Also:

1.There is no static class or method used inside WorkerThread that could cause the problem. My application consists of only the worker thread class and contains no static fields or methods

2.The library is supposed to be usable in a multithreaded environment. In my thread I just create a new instance of a library's class and then call methods on it. Nothing more.

My question is this: Without knowing any details of my implementation, is the above situation and facts enough to prove that there is a bug in the library and not in my programm? Is it safe to assume that the library might for example use a static object or an object shared between library created threads that is indirectly shared by my 2 threads and this causes the problem? If no then in what hypothetical situation could the bug origi开发者_开发问答nate in the worker class code?

EDIT: I didnt say the library because i want to know if the facts above can produce an answer to my question independently of the library, but anyway the library is rabbit mq java client. Each thread creates 1 connection and 2 channels and uses one to publish data and one to receive results.

EDIT 2: New fact: Problem seems to depend on the rate at which I send stuff to the queues. Sending in slower rate lowers the amount of wrong results.

I would assume the problem is in the library indeed.

However, I'd go further, check-out the library sources (or use a decompiler) and see (perhaps using a debugger) what is actually happening.

That way you will both prove the problem is not in your code & be able to submit a valuable bug-report.

It is hard to guess without knowing what library does. Even if library was designed for usage in multi thread environment, it still might require some additional actions from caller code (i.e. you) to work properly. Imagine that library is a DB driver and your threads do something with the same database. If DB-requests in threads are not properly grouped in transactions with proper isolation level, results might be bad.

However if library is not expected to work with some shared resource, odds that there is something wrong with library are high. In this case it might be good idea to create a minimal test application that proves bad behavior and submit it as bug report to the author of the library.

From your description I would say that the problem is that the library is opening a single connection to the server and it is not doing anything to multiples access from multiple worker threads. The reason that the one thread per process model works is that the server sees to separate connections and would never think to mix them.

I don't know if you could call this a bug though. Since we don't know more about the library in question. It might be the case that you are responsible for passing in an extra ID that will get returned with each request to figure out the correct target. Or it could be that the library expects you to properly serialize your interactions with it. In that case you need to pick an appropriate place to synchronize you access.

Your library might not be unconditionally thread safe but conditionally thread safe. I assume it is pretty hard to figure this out without the required documentation from the library owner/vendor. Your library could be conditionally thread safe which is according to Joshua Block -

Like unconditionally thread-safe, except that some methods require external synchronization for safe concurrent use. Examples include the collections returned by the Collections.synchronized wrappers, whose iterators require external synchronization

Without knowing any details of my implementation, is the above situation and facts enough to prove that there is a bug in the library and not in my programm?

No.

If no then in what hypothetical situation could the bug originate in the worker class code?

A hypothetical situation is when your two threads are publishing and receiving from the same queues/topics, and you have message ordering expectations that neither your program (e.g., via inter-thread coordination) nor the API/library guarantees.