"Parallel.For" for Java?

2023-01-21 13:08 问答作者：

I was wondering if there is a Parallel.Fo开发者_如何学Cr equivalent to the .net version for Java?

If there is could someone please supply an example? thanks!

I guess the closest thing would be:

ExecutorService exec = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(SOME_NUM_OF_THREADS);
try {
    for (final Object o : list) {
        exec.submit(new Runnable() {
            @Override
            public void run() {
                // do stuff with o.
            }
        });
    }
} finally {
    exec.shutdown();
}

Based on TheLQ's comments, you would set SUM_NUM_THREADS to Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors();

Edit: Decided to add a basic "Parallel.For" implementation

public class Parallel {
    private static final int NUM_CORES = Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors();

    private static final ExecutorService forPool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(NUM_CORES * 2, new NamedThreadFactory("Parallel.For"));

    public static <T> void For(final Iterable<T> elements, final Operation<T> operation) {
        try {
            // invokeAll blocks for us until all submitted tasks in the call complete
            forPool.invokeAll(createCallables(elements, operation));
        } catch (InterruptedException e) {
            e.printStackTrace();
        }
    }

    public static <T> Collection<Callable<Void>> createCallables(final Iterable<T> elements, final Operation<T> operation) {
        List<Callable<Void>> callables = new LinkedList<Callable<Void>>();
        for (final T elem : elements) {
            callables.add(new Callable<Void>() {
                @Override
                public Void call() {
                    operation.perform(elem);
                    return null;
                }
            });
        }

        return callables;
    }

    public static interface Operation<T> {
        public void perform(T pParameter);
    }
}

Example Usage of Parallel.For

// Collection of items to process in parallel
Collection<Integer> elems = new LinkedList<Integer>();
for (int i = 0; i < 40; ++i) {
    elems.add(i);
}
Parallel.For(elems, 
 // The operation to perform with each item
 new Parallel.Operation<Integer>() {
    public void perform(Integer param) {
        System.out.println(param);
    };
});

I guess this implementation is really more similar to Parallel.ForEach

Edit I put this up on GitHub if anyone is interested. Parallel For on GitHub

MLaw's solution is a very practical Parallel.ForEach. I added a bit modification to make a Parallel.For.

public class Parallel
{
static final int iCPU = Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors();

public static <T> void ForEach(Iterable <T> parameters,
                   final LoopBody<T> loopBody)
{
    ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(iCPU);
    List<Future<?>> futures  = new LinkedList<Future<?>>();

    for (final T param : parameters)
    {
        Future<?> future = executor.submit(new Runnable()
        {
            public void run() { loopBody.run(param); }
        });

        futures.add(future);
    }

    for (Future<?> f : futures)
    {
        try   { f.get(); }
        catch (InterruptedException e) { } 
        catch (ExecutionException   e) { }         
    }

    executor.shutdown();     
}

public static void For(int start,
                   int stop,
               final LoopBody<Integer> loopBody)
{
    ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(iCPU);
    List<Future<?>> futures  = new LinkedList<Future<?>>();

    for (int i=start; i<stop; i++)
    {
        final Integer k = i;
        Future<?> future = executor.submit(new Runnable()
        {
            public void run() { loopBody.run(k); }
        });     
        futures.add(future);
    }

    for (Future<?> f : futures)
    {
        try   { f.get(); }
        catch (InterruptedException e) { } 
        catch (ExecutionException   e) { }         
    }

    executor.shutdown();     
}
}

public interface LoopBody <T>
{
    void run(T i);
}

public class ParallelTest
{
int k;  

public ParallelTest()
{
    k = 0;
    Parallel.For(0, 10, new LoopBody <Integer>()
    {
        public void run(Integer i)
        {
            k += i;
            System.out.println(i);          
        }
    });
    System.out.println("Sum = "+ k);
}

public static void main(String [] argv)
{
    ParallelTest test = new ParallelTest();
}
}

Built upon mlaw suggestion, add CountDownLatch. Add chunksize to reduce submit().

When tested with 4 million items array, this one gives 5X speed up over sequential for() on my Core i7 2630QM CPU.

public class Loop {
    public interface Each {
        void run(int i);
    }

    private static final int CPUs = Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors();

    public static void withIndex(int start, int stop, final Each body) {
        int chunksize = (stop - start + CPUs - 1) / CPUs;
        int loops = (stop - start + chunksize - 1) / chunksize;
        ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(CPUs);
        final CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(loops);
        for (int i=start; i<stop;) {
            final int lo = i;
            i += chunksize;
            final int hi = (i<stop) ? i : stop;
            executor.submit(new Runnable() {
                public void run() {
                    for (int i=lo; i<hi; i++)
                        body.run(i);
                    latch.countDown();
                }
            });
        }
        try {
            latch.await();
        } catch (InterruptedException e) {}
        executor.shutdown();
    }

    public static void main(String [] argv) {
        Loop.withIndex(0, 9, new Loop.Each() {
            public void run(int i) {
                System.out.println(i*10);
            }
        });
    }
}

Here is my contribution to this topic https://github.com/pablormier/parallel-loops. The usage is very simple:

Collection<String> upperCaseWords = 
    Parallel.ForEach(words, new Parallel.F<String, String>() {
        public String apply(String s) {
            return s.toUpperCase();
        }
    });

It's also possible to change some behaviour aspects, like the number of threads (by default it uses a cached thread pool):

Collection<String> upperCaseWords = 
            new Parallel.ForEach<String, String>(words)
                .withFixedThreads(4)
                .apply(new Parallel.F<String, String>() {
                    public String apply(String s) {
                        return s.toUpperCase();
                    }
                }).values();

All the code is self-contained in one java class and has no more dependencies than the JDK. I also encourage you to check the new way to parallelize in a functional-style way with Java 8

Fork join framework in Java 7 is for concurrency support. But I don't know about an exact equivalent for Parallel.For.

A simpler option would be

// A thread pool which runs for the life of the application.
private static final ExecutorService EXEC = 
    Executors.newFixedThreadPool(SOME_NUM_OF_THREADS); 

//later 
EXEC.invokeAll(tasks); // you can optionally specify a timeout.

There is a equivalent for Parallel.For available as a java extension. It is called Ateji PX, they have a free version you can play with. http://www.ateji.com/px/index.html

It is the exact equivalent of parallel.for and looks similar to.

For ||

More examples and explaination on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ateji_PX

Closed thing in Java IMO

Synchronization often kills the speedup of parallel for-loops. Therefore, parallel for-loops often need their private data and a reduction mechanism to reduce all threads private data to comprise a single result.

So I've extended the Parallel.For version of Weimin Xiao by a reduction mechanism.

public class Parallel {
public static interface IntLoopBody {
    void run(int i);
}

public static interface LoopBody<T> {
    void run(T i);
}

public static interface RedDataCreator<T> {
    T run();
}

public static interface RedLoopBody<T> {
    void run(int i, T data);
}

public static interface Reducer<T> {
    void run(T returnData, T addData);
}

private static class ReductionData<T> {
    Future<?> future;
    T data;
}

static final int nCPU = Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors();

public static <T> void ForEach(Iterable <T> parameters, final LoopBody<T> loopBody) {
    ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(nCPU);
    List<Future<?>> futures  = new LinkedList<Future<?>>();

    for (final T param : parameters) {
        futures.add(executor.submit(() -> loopBody.run(param) ));
    }

    for (Future<?> f : futures) {
        try { 
            f.get();
        } catch (InterruptedException | ExecutionException e) { 
            System.out.println(e); 
        }
    }
    executor.shutdown();     
}

public static void For(int start, int stop, final IntLoopBody loopBody) {
    final int chunkSize = (stop - start + nCPU - 1)/nCPU;
    final int loops = (stop - start + chunkSize - 1)/chunkSize;
    ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(loops);
    List<Future<?>> futures  = new LinkedList<Future<?>>();

    for (int i=start; i < stop; ) {
        final int iStart = i;
        i += chunkSize;
        final int iStop = (i < stop) ? i : stop;

        futures.add(executor.submit(() -> {
            for (int j = iStart; j < iStop; j++) 
                loopBody.run(j);
        }));     
    }

    for (Future<?> f : futures) {
        try { 
            f.get();
        } catch (InterruptedException | ExecutionException e) { 
            System.out.println(e); 
        }
    }
    executor.shutdown();     
}

public static <T> void For(int start, int stop, T result, final RedDataCreator<T> creator, final RedLoopBody<T> loopBody, final Reducer<T> reducer) {
    final int chunkSize = (stop - start + nCPU - 1)/nCPU;
    final int loops = (stop - start + chunkSize - 1)/chunkSize;
    ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(loops);
    List<ReductionData<T>> redData  = new LinkedList<ReductionData<T>>();

    for (int i = start; i < stop; ) {
        final int iStart = i;
        i += chunkSize;
        final int iStop = (i < stop) ? i : stop;
        final ReductionData<T> rd = new ReductionData<T>();

        rd.data = creator.run();
        rd.future = executor.submit(() -> {
            for (int j = iStart; j < iStop; j++) {
                loopBody.run(j, rd.data);
            }
        });
        redData.add(rd);
    }

    for (ReductionData<T> rd : redData) {
        try { 
            rd.future.get();
            if (rd.data != null) {
                reducer.run(result, rd.data);
            }
        } catch (InterruptedException | ExecutionException e) { 
            e.printStackTrace();
        }
    }
    executor.shutdown();     
}
}

Here is a simple test example: a parallel character counter using a non-synchronized map.

import java.util.*;

public class ParallelTest {
static class Counter {
    int cnt;

    Counter() {
        cnt = 1;
    }
}

public static void main(String[] args) {
    String text = "More formally, if this map contains a mapping from a key k to a " + 
            "value v such that key compares equal to k according to the map's ordering, then " +
            "this method returns v; otherwise it returns null.";
    Map<Character, Counter> charCounter1 = new TreeMap<Character, Counter>();
    Map<Character, Counter> charCounter2 = new TreeMap<Character, Counter>();

    // first sequentially
    for(int i=0; i < text.length(); i++) {
        char c = text.charAt(i);
        Counter cnt = charCounter1.get(c);
        if (cnt == null) {
            charCounter1.put(c, new Counter());
        } else {
            cnt.cnt++;
        }
    }
    for(Map.Entry<Character, Counter> entry: charCounter1.entrySet()) {
        System.out.println(entry.getKey() + ": " + entry.getValue().cnt);
    }

    // now parallel without synchronization
    Parallel.For(0, text.length(), charCounter2,
        // Creator
        () -> new TreeMap<Character, Counter>(), 
        // Loop Body
        (i, map) -> {
            char c = text.charAt(i);
            Counter cnt = map.get(c);
            if (cnt == null) {
                map.put(c, new Counter());
            } else {
                cnt.cnt++;
            }
        }, 
        // Reducer
        (result, map) -> {
            for(Map.Entry<Character, Counter> entry: map.entrySet()) {
                Counter cntR = result.get(entry.getKey());
                if (cntR == null) {
                    result.put(entry.getKey(), entry.getValue());
                } else {
                    cntR.cnt += entry.getValue().cnt;
                }
            }
        }
    );

    // compare results
    assert charCounter1.size() == charCounter2.size() : "wrong size: " + charCounter1.size() + ", " + charCounter2.size();
    Iterator<Map.Entry<Character, Counter>> it2 = charCounter2.entrySet().iterator();
    for(Map.Entry<Character, Counter> entry: charCounter1.entrySet()) {
        Map.Entry<Character, Counter> entry2 = it2.next();
        assert entry.getKey() == entry2.getKey() && entry.getValue().cnt == entry2.getValue().cnt : "wrong content";
    }

    System.out.println("Well done!");
}
}

I have an updated Java Parallel class which can do Parallel.For, Parallel.ForEach, Parallel.Tasks, and partitioned parallel loop. Source code is as follows:

Examples of using those parallel loops are the following:

public static void main(String [] argv)
{
    //sample data
    final ArrayList<String> ss = new ArrayList<String>();

    String [] s = {"a", "b", "c", "d", "e", "f", "g"};
    for (String z : s) ss.add(z);
    int m = ss.size();

    //parallel-for loop
    System.out.println("Parallel.For loop:");
    Parallel.For(0, m, new LoopBody<Integer>()
    {
        public void run(Integer i)
        {
           System.out.println(i +"\t"+ ss.get(i));   
        }       
    });   

   //parallel for-each loop
   System.out.println("Parallel.ForEach loop:");
   Parallel.ForEach(ss, new LoopBody<String>()
   {
       public void run(String p)
       {
           System.out.println(p);               
       }       
   });

   //partitioned parallel loop
   System.out.println("Partitioned Parallel loop:");
   Parallel.ForEach(Parallel.create(0, m), new LoopBody<Partition>()
   {
       public void run(Partition p)
       {
           for(int i=p.start; i<p.end; i++)
               System.out.println(i +"\t"+ ss.get(i));
       }
   });

   //parallel tasks
   System.out.println("Parallel Tasks:");
   Parallel.Tasks(new Task []
   {
       //task-1
       new Task() {public void run()
       {
           for(int i=0; i<3; i++)
               System.out.println(i +"\t"+ ss.get(i));
       }},

       //task-2
       new Task() {public void run()
       {
           for (int i=3; i<6; i++)
               System.out.println(i +"\t"+ ss.get(i));
       }}   
   });
}

I found ForkJoinPool and IntStream much helpfull in my case (Parallel For with limited number of threads).

C#:

static void MathParallel(int threads)
        {
            Parallel.For(1, partitions, new ParallelOptions { MaxDegreeOfParallelism = threads }, (i) => {
                partitionScores[i] = Math.Sin(3*i);
            });
        }

and Java equivalent:

static void mathParallel(int threads) {
        ForkJoinPool pool = new ForkJoinPool(threads);
            pool.submit(()-> IntStream.range(0, partitions).parallel().forEach(i -> {
                partitionScores[i] = Math.sin(3*i);
            }));
        pool.shutdown();
        while (!pool.isTerminated()){
        }
    }

This is what I use for Java 7 and less.

For Java 8 you can use forEach()

[UPDATE ]