I have several threads which all run the same function. In each of these they generate a different random number several times. We tried to do this by putting srand(time(0)) at the start of the function, but it seems that they all get the same number.
Do we need to call srand(time(0)) only once per program, i.e at the start of main (for example), at the start of each function that is called several times, or something else?
srand() seeds the random number generator. You should only have to call srand(time(NULL)) once during startup.
That said, the documentation states:
The function
rand()is not reentrant or thread-safe, since it uses hidden state that is modified on each call. This might just be the seed value to be used by the next call, or it might be something more elaborate. In order to get reproducible behaviour in a threaded application, this state must be made explicit. The functionrand_r()is supplied with a pointer to anunsigned int, to be used as state. This is a very small amount of state, so this function will be a weak pseudo-random generator. Trydrand48_r(3) instead.
The emphasized part of the above is probably the reason why all your threads get the same number.
rand() can easily be thread safe. It is up to a specific implementation.
rand() is not required to be thread-safe, so a portable multi-threaded program cannot safely use it (except by protecting it with a mutex or similar). C17 7.22.2.1p3: "The rand function is not required to avoid data races with other calls to pseudo-random sequence generation functions [such as itself]".As you are using C++, rather than C, you may be able to avoid the threading problems often associated with srand/rand by using c++11. This depends on using a recent compiler which supports these features. You would use a separate engine and distribution on each thread. The example acts like a dice.
#include <random>
#include <functional>
std::uniform_int_distribution<int> dice_distribution(1, 6);
std::mt19937 random_number_engine; // pseudorandom number generator
auto dice_roller = std::bind(dice_distribution, random_number_engine);
int random_roll = dice_roller(); // Generate one of the integers 1,2,3,4,5,6.
I referred to Wikipedia C++11 and Boost random when answering this question.
From the rand man page:
The function rand() is not reentrant or thread-safe, since it uses hidden state that is modified on each call.
So don't use it with threaded code. Use rand_r (or drand48_r if you're on linux/glibc). Seed each RNG with a different value (you could seed a first RNG in the main thread to produce random seeds for the ones in each thread).
rand seems to be a thread-safe version of rand_r in glibc, not vice-versa (if I am interpreting the source code correctly).
If you are launching the threads all at the same time, the time sent to srand is probably the same for each thread. Since they all have the same seed, they all return the same sequence. Try using something else like a memory address from a local variable.
srand and rand are not thread-safe, they may share state data. In such case, calling srand in one thread will set it for all threads, and, additionally, data-race errors may occur.C was not designed for multithreading, so behavior of srand() with multithreading is not defined and depends on the C runtime library.
Many Unix/Linux C runtime libraries use single static state, which is not safe to access from multiple threads, so with these C runtimes you should not use srand() and rand() from multiple threads at all (using might result in race conditions). Other Unix C runtimes may behave differently.
Visual C++ runtime uses per-thread internal state, so it is safe to call srand() for each thread. But as Neil pointed out, you will likely seed all threads with same value - so seed with (time + thread-id) instead.
Of course, for portability, use Random objects rather than rand function, and then you would not depend on hidden state at all. You still need one object per thread, and seeding each object with (time + thread-id) is still a good idea.
That's a good question. I can't directly answer it because I think there are bigger issues. It doesn't even seem to be clear that rand is thread safe at all anyway. It maintains internals state and it doesn't seem to be well defined if that's per process or per thread, and if it's per process if it's thread safe.
To be sure I would lock a mutex around each access.
Or preferably use a better defined generate such as one from boost
