@@ -85,7 +85,9 @@ Race conditions
8585 ` putAll() ` under the lock?] ( #synchronized-collection-iter )
8686
8787Testing
88- - [ Unit tests for thread-safe classes are multi-threaded?] ( #multi-threaded-tests )
88+ - [ Considered adding multi-threaded unit tests for a thread-safe classes?] ( #multi-threaded-tests )
89+ - [ What is the worst thing that might happen if the code has a concurrency bug?
90+ ] ( #multi-threaded-tests )
8991 - [ A shared ` Random ` instance is * not* used from concurrent test workers?] ( #concurrent-test-random )
9092 - [ Concurrent test workers coordinate their start?] ( #coordinate-test-workers )
9193 - [ There are more test threads than CPUs (if possible for the test)?] ( #test-workers-interleavings )
@@ -744,8 +746,16 @@ collections.
744746### Testing
745747
746748<a name =" multi-threaded-tests " ></a >
747- [ #] ( #multi-threaded-tests ) T.1. ** Are unit tests for thread-safe classes multi-threaded?**
748- Single-threaded tests don't really test the thread safety and concurrency.
749+ [ #] ( #multi-threaded-tests ) T.1. ** Was it considered to add multi-threaded unit tests for a
750+ thread-safe classes?** Single-threaded tests don't really test the thread safety and concurrency.
751+ Note that this question doesn't mean to indicate that there * must* be concurrent unit tests for
752+ every piece of concurrent code in the project because correct concurrent tests take a lot of effort
753+ to write and therefore they might often have low ROI.
754+ 755+ ** What is the worst thing that might happen if this code has a concurrency bug?** is a useful
756+ question to inform the decision about writing concurrent tests. The consequences may range from a
757+ tiny, entirely undetectable memory leak, to storing corrupted data in a durable database or
758+ a security breach.
749759
750760<a name =" concurrent-test-random " ></a >
751761[ #] ( #concurrent-test-random ) T.2. ** Isn't a shared ` java.util.Random ` object used for data
0 commit comments