问题
I have trouble finding any up-to-date information on this.
Do C++11 versions of STL containers have some level of thread safety guaranteed?
I do expect that they don't, due to performance reasons. But then again, that's why we have both std::vector::operator[] and std::vector::at.
回答1:
Since the existing answers don't cover it (only a comment does), I'll just mention 23.2.2 [container.requirements.dataraces] of the current C++ standard specification which says:
implementations are required to avoid data races when the contents of the contained object in different elements in the same sequence, excepting
vector<bool>, are modified concurrently.
i.e. it's safe to access distinct elements of the same container, so for example you can have a global std::vector<std::future<int>> of ten elements and have ten threads which each write to a different element of the vector.
Apart from that, the same rules apply to containers as for the rest of the standard library (see 17.6.5.9 [res.on.data.races]), as Mr.C64's answer says, and additionally [container.requirements.dataraces] lists some non-const member functions of containers that can be called safely because they only return non-const references to elements, they don't actually modify anything (in general any non-const member function must be considered a modification.)
回答2:
I think STL containers offer the following basic thread-safety guarantee:
simultaneous reads of the same object are OK
simultaneous read/writes of different objects are OK
But you have to use some form of custom synchronization (e.g. critical section) if you want to do something different, like e.g. simultaneous writes on the same object.
回答3:
No. Check out PPL or Intel TBB for thread safe STL-like containers.
Like others have noted they have usual "multiple reader thread safety" but that is even pre C++11. Ofc this doesnt mean single writer multiple readers. It means 0 writers. :)
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12931787/c11-stl-containers-and-thread-safety