24 Collections Framework Interview Questions & Answers for Java developers

18. What is the difference between Sorting performance of Arrays.sort() vs Collections.sort() ? Which one is faster? Which one to use and when?
Many developers are concerned about the performance difference between java.util.Array.sort() java.util.Collections.sort() methods. Both methods have same algorithm the only difference is type of input to them. Collections.sort() has a input as List so it does a translation of List to array and vice versa which is an additional step while sorting. So this should be used when you are trying to sort a list. Arrays.sort is for arrays so the sorting is done directly on the array. So clearly it should be used when you have a array available with you and you want to sort it.
19. What is java.util.concurrent BlockingQueue? How it can be used?
Java has implementation of BlockingQueue available since Java 1.5. Blocking Queue interface extends collection interface, which provides you power of collections inside a queue. Blocking Queue is a type of Queue that additionally supports operations that wait for the queue to become non-empty when retrieving an element, and wait for space to become available in the queue when storing an element. A typical usage example would be based on a producer-consumer scenario. Note that a BlockingQueue can safely be used with multiple producers and multiple consumers. An ArrayBlockingQueue is a implementation of blocking queue with an array used to store the queued objects. The head of the queue is that element that has been on the queue the longest time. The tail of the queue is that element that has been on the queue the shortest time. New elements are inserted at the tail of the queue, and the queue retrieval operations obtain elements at the head of the queue. ArrayBlockingQueue requires you to specify the capacity of queue at the object construction time itself. Once created, the capacity cannot be increased. This is a classic "bounded buffer" (fixed size buffer), in which a fixed-sized array holds elements inserted by producers and extracted by consumers. Attempts to put an element to a full queue will result in the put operation blocking; attempts to retrieve an element from an empty queue will be blocked.
20. Set & List interface extend Collection, so Why doesn't Map interface extend Collection?
Though the Map interface is part of collections framework, it does not extend collection interface. This is by design, and the answer to this questions is best described in Sun's FAQ Page: This was by design. We feel that mappings are not collections and collections are not mappings. Thus, it makes little sense for Map to extend the Collection interface (or vice versa). If a Map is a Collection, what are the elements? The only reasonable answer is "Key-value pairs", but this provides a very limited (and not particularly useful) Map abstraction. You can't ask what value a given key maps to, nor can you delete the entry for a given key without knowing what value it maps to. Collection could be made to extend Map, but this raises the question: what are the keys? There's no really satisfactory answer, and forcing one leads to an unnatural interface. Maps can be viewed as Collections (of keys, values, or pairs), and this fact is reflected in the three "Collection view operations" on Maps (keySet, entrySet, and values). While it is, in principle, possible to view a List as a Map mapping indices to elements, this has the nasty property that deleting an element from the List changes the Key associated with every element before the deleted element. That's why we don't have a map view operation on Lists.
21. Which implementation of the List interface provides for the fastest insertion of a new element into the middle of the list?
a. Vector b. ArrayList c. LinkedList ArrayList and Vector both use an array to store the elements of the list. When an element is inserted into the middle of the list the elements that follow the insertion point must be shifted to make room for the new element. The LinkedList is implemented using a doubly linked list; an insertion requires only the updating of the links at the point of insertion. Therefore, the LinkedList allows for fast insertions and deletions.
22. What is the difference between ArrayList and LinkedList? (ArrayList vs LinkedList.)
java.util.ArrayList and java.util.LinkedList are two Collections classes used for storing lists of object references Here are some key differences:
• ArrayList uses primitive object array for storing objects whereas LinkedList is made up of a chain of nodes. Each node stores an element and the pointer to the next node. A singly linked list only has pointers to next. A doubly linked list has a pointer to the next and the previous element. This makes walking the list backward easier.
• ArrayList implements the RandomAccess interface, and LinkedList does not. The commonly used ArrayList implementation uses primitive Object array for internal storage. Therefore an ArrayList is much faster than a LinkedList for random access, that is, when accessing arbitrary list elements using the get method. Note that the get method is implemented for LinkedLists, but it requires a sequential scan from the front or back of the list. This scan is very slow. For a LinkedList, there's no fast way to access the Nth element of the list.
• Adding and deleting at the start and middle of the ArrayList is slow, because all the later elements have to be copied forward or backward. (Using System.arrayCopy()) Whereas Linked lists are faster for inserts and deletes anywhere in the list, since all you do is update a few next and previous pointers of a node.
• Each element of a linked list (especially a doubly linked list) uses a bit more memory than its equivalent in array list, due to the need for next and previous pointers.
• ArrayList may also have a performance issue when the internal array fills up. The arrayList has to create a new array and copy all the elements there. The ArrayList has a growth algorithm of (n*3)/2+1, meaning that each time the buffer is too small it will create a new one of size (n*3)/2+1 where n is the number of elements of the current buffer. Hence if we can guess the number of elements that we are going to have, then it makes sense to create a arraylist with that capacity during object creation (using construtor new ArrayList(capacity)). Whereas LinkedLists should not have such capacity issues.
23. Where will you use ArrayList and Where will you use LinkedList? Or Which one to use when (ArrayList / LinkedList).
Below is a snippet from SUN's site. The Java SDK contains 2 implementations of the List interface - ArrayList and LinkedList. If you frequently add elements to the beginning of the List or iterate over the List to delete elements from its interior, you should consider using LinkedList. These operations require constant-time in a LinkedList and linear-time in an ArrayList. But you pay a big price in performance. Positional access requires linear-time in a LinkedList and constant-time in an ArrayList.
24. What is performance of various Java collection implementations/algorithms? What is Big 'O' notation for each of them ?
Each java collection implementation class have different performance for different methods, which makes them suitable for different programming needs.

• Performance of Map interface implementations

Hashtable

An instance of Hashtable has two parameters that affect its performance: initial capacity and load factor. The capacity is the number of buckets in the hash table, and the initial capacity is simply the capacity at the time the hash table is created. Note that the hash table is open: in the case of a "hash collision", a single bucket stores multiple entries, which must be searched sequentially. The load factor is a measure of how full the hash table is allowed to get before its capacity is automatically increased. The initial capacity and load factor parameters are merely hints to the implementation. The exact details as to when and whether the rehash method is invoked are implementation-dependent.

HashMap

This implementation provides constant-time [ Big O Notation is O(1) ] performance for the basic operations (get and put), assuming the hash function disperses the elements properly among the buckets. Iteration over collection views requires time proportional to the "capacity" of the HashMap instance (the number of buckets) plus its size (the number of key-value mappings). Thus, it's very important not to set the initial capacity too high (or the load factor too low) if iteration performance is important.

TreeMap

The TreeMap implementation provides guaranteed log(n) [ Big O Notation is O(log N) ] time cost for the containsKey, get, put and remove operations.

LinkedHashMap

A linked hash map has two parameters that affect its performance: initial capacity and load factor. They are defined precisely as for HashMap. Note, however, that the penalty for choosing an excessively high value for initial capacity is less severe for this class than for HashMap, as iteration times for this class are unaffected by capacity.

• Performance of Set interface implementations

HashSet

The HashSet class offers constant-time [ Big O Notation is O(1) ] performance for the basic operations (add, remove, contains and size), assuming the hash function disperses the elements properly among the buckets. Iterating over this set requires time proportional to the sum of the HashSet instance's size (the number of elements) plus the "capacity" of the backing HashMap instance (the number of buckets). Thus, it's very important not to set the initial capacity too high (or the load factor too low) if iteration performance is important.

TreeSet

The TreeSet implementation provides guaranteed log(n) time cost for the basic operations (add, remove and contains).

LinkedHashSet

A linked hash set has two parameters that affect its performance: initial capacity and load factor. They are defined precisely as for HashSet. Note, however, that the penalty for choosing an excessively high value for initial capacity is less severe for this class than for HashSet, as iteration times for this class are unaffected by capacity.

• Performance of List interface implementations

LinkedList

- Performance of get and remove methods is linear time [ Big O Notation is O(n) ] - Performance of add and Iterator.remove methods is constant-time [ Big O Notation is O(1) ]

ArrayList

- The size, isEmpty, get, set, iterator, and listIterator operations run in constant time. [ Big O Notation is O(1) ] - The add operation runs in amortized constant time [ Big O Notation is O(1) ] , but in worst case (since the array must be resized and copied) adding n elements requires linear time [ Big O Notation is O(n) ] - Performance of remove method is linear time [ Big O Notation is O(n) ] - All of the other operations run in linear time [ Big O Notation is O(n) ]. The constant factor is low compared to that for the LinkedList implementation.

Can you think of a questions which is not part of this post? Please don't forget to share it with me in comments section & I will try to include it in the list.