import java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentLinkedQueue;import java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch;import java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService;import java.util.concurrent.Executors;public class ConcurrentLinkedQueueTest1 {    public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {        int peopleNum = 10000;//吃饭人数        int tableNUm = 10;//饭桌数量        ConcurrentLinkedQueue
     
       queue = new ConcurrentLinkedQueue<>();//队列        CountDownLatch count = new CountDownLatch(tableNUm);//计数器        //将吃饭人数放入队列（吃饭的人排队）        for(int i = 0;i
      
        queue;        private CountDownLatch count;        public Dinner(String name, ConcurrentLinkedQueue
       
         queue, CountDownLatch count) {            this.name = name;            this.queue = queue;            this.count = count;        }        @Override        public void run() {            //通过两种方式比较耗时            while(queue.size()>0){           // while(!queue.isEmpty()){
                    System.out.println("【"+queue.poll() +"】---已吃完...,饭桌编号:"+name);            }            count.countDown();        }    }}
       
      
     

通过上面的测试，得出结论：size()方法比isEmpty()耗时更长，原因是size() 是要遍历一遍集合的.