notify()将唤醒一个线程，而notifyAll()将唤醒所有线程。据我所知，没有中间立场。但是如果你不确定notify()会对你的线程做什么，使用notifyAll()。每次都很灵验。

我认为这取决于资源是如何生产和消费的。如果同时有5个工作对象，并且您有5个消费者对象，那么使用notifyAll()唤醒所有线程是有意义的，这样每个线程都可以处理1个工作对象。

如果您只有一个可用的工作对象，那么唤醒所有使用者对象来争夺这个对象有什么意义呢?第一个检查可用工作的线程将得到它，所有其他线程将检查并发现它们无事可做。

我在这里找到了一个很好的解释。简而言之:

The notify() method is generally used for resource pools, where there are an arbitrary number of "consumers" or "workers" that take resources, but when a resource is added to the pool, only one of the waiting consumers or workers can deal with it. The notifyAll() method is actually used in most other cases. Strictly, it is required to notify waiters of a condition that could allow multiple waiters to proceed. But this is often difficult to know. So as a general rule, if you have no particular logic for using notify(), then you should probably use notifyAll(), because it is often difficult to know exactly what threads will be waiting on a particular object and why.

我想提一下《Java并发实践》中解释的内容:

第一点，是Notify还是NotifyAll?

It will be NotifyAll, and reason is that it will save from signall hijacking.

If two threads A and B are waiting on different condition predicates of same condition queue and notify is called, then it is upto JVM to which thread JVM will notify. Now if notify was meant for thread A and JVM notified thread B, then thread B will wake up and see that this notification is not useful so it will wait again. And Thread A will never come to know about this missed signal and someone hijacked it's notification. So, calling notifyAll will resolve this issue, but again it will have performance impact as it will notify all threads and all threads will compete for same lock and it will involve context switch and hence load on CPU. But we should care about performance only if it is behaving correctly, if it's behavior itself is not correct then performance is of no use.

这个问题可以通过使用jdk 5中提供的显式锁定Lock的Condition对象来解决，因为它为每个条件谓词提供了不同的等待。在这里，它将表现正确，不会有性能问题，因为它将调用信号，并确保只有一个线程正在等待该条件

虽然上面有一些可靠的答案，但我对我读到的困惑和误解的数量感到惊讶。这可能证明了应该尽可能多地使用java.util.concurrent，而不是尝试编写自己的坏并发代码。

回到问题:总结一下，目前的最佳实践是在所有情况下避免notify()，因为会出现丢失唤醒的问题。任何不理解这一点的人都不应该被允许编写关键任务并发代码。如果你担心羊群问题，实现一次唤醒一个线程的安全方法是:

为等待线程构建一个显式的等待队列; 让队列中的每个线程等待它的前一个线程; 完成后让每个线程调用notifyAll()。

或者你可以使用Java.util.concurrent。*，它们已经实现了这一点。

我很惊讶居然没有人提到臭名昭著的“失醒”问题(谷歌it)。

基本上:

如果有多个线程在等待同一个条件， 可以让你从状态A转换到状态B的多个线程， 可以让你从状态B转换到状态A的多个线程(通常是与状态1相同的线程)， 从状态A转换到状态B应该通知1中的线程。

然后，您应该使用notifyAll，除非您有可证明的保证，丢失的唤醒是不可能的。

一个常见的例子是并发FIFO队列，其中: 多个排队者(1。和3。)可以将队列从空转换为非空 多个退出队列器(2。上面)可以等待条件“队列不是空的” Empty ->非空应该通知脱队列者

您可以很容易地编写一个交叉操作，其中从一个空队列开始，2个入队者和2个出队者交互，1个入队者保持休眠状态。

这是一个可以与死锁问题相比较的问题。

摘自Effective Java博客:

The notifyAll method should generally be used in preference to notify. 

If notify is used, great care must be taken to ensure liveness.

所以，我的理解是(从前面提到的博客，“Yann TM”对公认答案和Java文档的评论):

notify() : JVM awakens one of the waiting threads on this object. Thread selection is made arbitrarily without fairness. So same thread can be awakened again and again. So system's state changes but no real progress is made. Thus creating a livelock. notifyAll() : JVM awakens all threads and then all threads race for the lock on this object. Now, CPU scheduler selects a thread which acquires lock on this object. This selection process would be much better than selection by JVM. Thus, ensuring liveness.