Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • 15:53
    Aaronontheweb synchronize #3973
  • 15:52

    dependabot-preview[bot] on dev

    Bump Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk fro… (compare)

  • 15:52

    dependabot-preview[bot] on nuget

    (compare)

  • 15:52
    dependabot-preview[bot] closed #3996
  • 15:52
    Aaronontheweb commented #3996
  • 14:53
    Aaronontheweb commented #3973
  • 12:20
    IgorFedchenko commented #3973
  • 12:17
    IgorFedchenko commented #3973
  • 11:58
    IgorFedchenko synchronize #3973
  • 11:33
    IgorFedchenko commented #3973
  • 11:25
    IgorFedchenko synchronize #3973
  • 07:04
    dependabot-preview[bot] labeled #3996
  • 07:04
    dependabot-preview[bot] opened #3996
  • 07:04

    dependabot-preview[bot] on nuget

    Bump Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk fro… (compare)

  • 07:04
    dependabot-preview[bot] labeled #3995
  • 07:04

    dependabot-preview[bot] on nuget

    Bump BenchmarkDotNet from 0.10.… (compare)

  • 07:04
    dependabot-preview[bot] opened #3995
  • Oct 17 22:42
    Aaronontheweb commented #3944
  • Oct 17 22:41
    Aaronontheweb commented #3973
  • Oct 17 21:17
    IgorFedchenko commented #3973
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
but how can we use synccontext when we dont own the threads?
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
@rogeralsing I agree. The fact that we need to carry state around is the cause of most of our TPL issues
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
just thinking out loud here
winforms/wpf/asp.net require synccontext but only for some special cases where you want to run in that ui thread
those are minor cases. maybe if synccontext worked, akka.net could still run in those environments without context
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
Akka is the same @Nvivo
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
we have our dispatchers, they could dispatch onto whatever, thread pool, new threads, existing threads, someone elses threads.
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
@Danthar sorry, didn't get it
what is the same?
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
so we cannot assume we have the right to change the synccontext on an existing thread
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
i know
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
look at it like this: Akka has its own gui context. Only then its not the GUI but the actor context it needs to marshall back on
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
I get what you're saying, I don't know why =)
what did I say?
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
winforms/wpf/asp.net require synccontext but only for some special cases where you want to run in that ui thread
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
maybe I expressed myself wrong
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
and the bit about maybe running in environments without context
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
let me try again
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
akka will always have its own local actor context it needs to carry around
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
the reason akka cannot assume it can change sync context is because of these environments? or are there more reasons?
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
Steven Cleary who wrote that blogpost wrote somewhere else that if you do own the thread: synccontext, if you dont own the thread, TaskScheduler
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
because at least from my perspective, even in asp.net or winforms, I'd usually run the actor system in the default thread pool for almost everything
this is the part where I get confused
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
:nods: But what will happen when you switch to another dispatcher implementation. like one that does not use the threadpool ? How will the TPL react to that? I really have no idea
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
too many subjects. that's the part where talking is easier to follow up =)
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
Orleans have its own mini threadpool afaik, so they can do whatever they want
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
right
and dedicatedthreadpool is nowhere near what threadpool is currently
Still, what I get confused is that stephen cleary also has some examples of creating your own sync context and I don't remember reading about requiring your own thread pool
i need to read more about this
I think this idea of "owning the thread" is not exactly creating the thread yourself
but i may be wrong
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
Ill see if I can find the post
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
I'm thinking about posting a question on stackoverflow and see if he answers
I think you sent me the post link once in a discussion
what I'd like to know is: if syncrhonizationcontext seems to be the only safe way to keep context between async calls, is it possible for us to implement one safely using the thread pool?
and note that at this point I'm not worried about how to run akka in ui threads, I'd just like to know if that is possible or not
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
Its should be possible
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
I cc'ed Stephen in our issue now
but if we use CallContext, and only store single values and not mutating any structure, that should be safe, no?
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
I guess it would, but I still think setting the call context is not the best performance. in theory, sync context should be faster because we don't need to guess when it needs to be set
Arjen Smits
@Danthar
Its at least worth a try. but its really hard to test
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
although in theory, the same solution should be possible with callcontext if we control the schedulers
maybe I'm talking 2 different things
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
the good think now, is that everyone involved seem to understand what the problem is :) that was a bit of a pain initially to try to communicate
Natan Vivo
@nvivo
roger, one thing that puzzles me is this
when using the synccontext, it seems the way it works is that context is captured when the task is scheduled, and brought back when the task will run
but akka seems to set the callcontext in other places outside of the scheduler
is this right? I may have to look at the code again
Roger Johansson
@rogeralsing
this is because of reentrancy.. if we only had the "suspend" behavior, that would be easy to solve the way you describe, but as we can multiplex many messages on the same actor, we need to re-set the context