我做了一个视频来解释这个。

从本质上讲，它是当你有一个跨多个线程共享的状态，在一个给定状态的第一次执行完成之前，另一个执行开始，一个给定操作的新线程的初始状态是错误的，因为前一次执行还没有完成。

由于第二次执行的初始状态是错误的，因此计算结果也是错误的。因为最终第二次执行会用错误的结果更新最终状态。

你可以在这里查看。 https://youtu.be/RWRicNoWKOY

一个有点规范的定义是“当两个线程同时访问内存中的同一个位置，并且至少有一次访问是写操作。”在这种情况下，“reader”线程可能获得旧值或新值，这取决于哪个线程“赢得了比赛”。这并不总是一个bug——事实上，一些非常复杂的低级算法会故意这样做——但通常应该避免。@Steve Gury的例子很好地说明了这可能是个问题。

为了更好地理解竞态条件，请尝试以下基本示例:

    public class ThreadRaceCondition {

    /**
     * @param args
     * @throws InterruptedException
     */
    public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
        Account myAccount = new Account(22222222);

        // Expected deposit: 250
        for (int i = 0; i < 50; i++) {
            Transaction t = new Transaction(myAccount,
                    Transaction.TransactionType.DEPOSIT, 5.00);
            t.start();
        }

        // Expected withdrawal: 50
        for (int i = 0; i < 50; i++) {
            Transaction t = new Transaction(myAccount,
                    Transaction.TransactionType.WITHDRAW, 1.00);
            t.start();

        }

        // Temporary sleep to ensure all threads are completed. Don't use in
        // realworld :-)
        Thread.sleep(1000);
        // Expected account balance is 200
        System.out.println("Final Account Balance: "
                + myAccount.getAccountBalance());

    }

}

class Transaction extends Thread {

    public static enum TransactionType {
        DEPOSIT(1), WITHDRAW(2);

        private int value;

        private TransactionType(int value) {
            this.value = value;
        }

        public int getValue() {
            return value;
        }
    };

    private TransactionType transactionType;
    private Account account;
    private double amount;

    /*
     * If transactionType == 1, deposit else if transactionType == 2 withdraw
     */
    public Transaction(Account account, TransactionType transactionType,
            double amount) {
        this.transactionType = transactionType;
        this.account = account;
        this.amount = amount;
    }

    public void run() {
        switch (this.transactionType) {
        case DEPOSIT:
            deposit();
            printBalance();
            break;
        case WITHDRAW:
            withdraw();
            printBalance();
            break;
        default:
            System.out.println("NOT A VALID TRANSACTION");
        }
        ;
    }

    public void deposit() {
        this.account.deposit(this.amount);
    }

    public void withdraw() {
        this.account.withdraw(amount);
    }

    public void printBalance() {
        System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName()
                + " : TransactionType: " + this.transactionType + ", Amount: "
                + this.amount);
        System.out.println("Account Balance: "
                + this.account.getAccountBalance());
    }
}

class Account {
    private int accountNumber;
    private double accountBalance;

    public int getAccountNumber() {
        return accountNumber;
    }

    public double getAccountBalance() {
        return accountBalance;
    }

    public Account(int accountNumber) {
        this.accountNumber = accountNumber;
    }

    // If this method is not synchronized, you will see race condition on
    // Remove syncronized keyword to see race condition
    public synchronized boolean deposit(double amount) {
        if (amount < 0) {
            return false;
        } else {
            accountBalance = accountBalance + amount;
            return true;
        }
    }

    // If this method is not synchronized, you will see race condition on
    // Remove syncronized keyword to see race condition
    public synchronized boolean withdraw(double amount) {
        if (amount > accountBalance) {
            return false;
        } else {
            accountBalance = accountBalance - amount;
            return true;
        }
    }
}

Race conditions occur in multi-threaded applications or multi-process systems. A race condition, at its most basic, is anything that makes the assumption that two things not in the same thread or process will happen in a particular order, without taking steps to ensure that they do. This happens commonly when two threads are passing messages by setting and checking member variables of a class both can access. There's almost always a race condition when one thread calls sleep to give another thread time to finish a task (unless that sleep is in a loop, with some checking mechanism).

防止竞争条件的工具依赖于语言和操作系统，但一些常见的工具是互斥锁、临界区和信号。互斥锁在你想确保你是唯一一个在做某事的时候很有用。当你想确保别人已经完成某件事时，信号是很好的。最小化共享资源还有助于防止意外行为

Detecting race conditions can be difficult, but there are a couple signs. Code which relies heavily on sleeps is prone to race conditions, so first check for calls to sleep in the affected code. Adding particularly long sleeps can also be used for debugging to try and force a particular order of events. This can be useful for reproducing the behavior, seeing if you can make it disappear by changing the timing of things, and for testing solutions put in place. The sleeps should be removed after debugging.

但是，如果某个问题只在某些机器上断断续续地发生，则是存在竞争条件的标志性标志。常见的错误是崩溃和死锁。使用日志记录，您应该能够找到受影响的区域并从那里返回。

考虑一个操作，该操作必须在计数增加时立即显示计数。ie。，只要CounterThread增加值，DisplayThread就需要显示最近更新的值。

int i = 0;

输出

CounterThread -> i = 1  
DisplayThread -> i = 1  
CounterThread -> i = 2  
CounterThread -> i = 3  
CounterThread -> i = 4  
DisplayThread -> i = 4

在这里，CounterThread频繁地获取锁，并在DisplayThread显示它之前更新值。这里存在一个竞态条件。竞争条件可以通过使用同步来解决

我做了一个视频来解释这个。

从本质上讲，它是当你有一个跨多个线程共享的状态，在一个给定状态的第一次执行完成之前，另一个执行开始，一个给定操作的新线程的初始状态是错误的，因为前一次执行还没有完成。

由于第二次执行的初始状态是错误的，因此计算结果也是错误的。因为最终第二次执行会用错误的结果更新最终状态。

你可以在这里查看。 https://youtu.be/RWRicNoWKOY