Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • 14:40
    cptjazz synchronize #3974
  • 14:07
    cptjazz opened #3974
  • 08:30
    ismaelhamed commented #3937
  • Oct 12 15:50
    IrvinDominin opened #127
  • Oct 11 18:21
    Aaronontheweb commented #3973
  • Oct 11 18:20
    Aaronontheweb commented #3937
  • Oct 11 18:16
    Zetanova commented #3937
  • Oct 11 18:11
    Zetanova commented #3937
  • Oct 11 15:09
    Aaronontheweb commented #3937
  • Oct 11 15:08
    Aaronontheweb commented #3937
  • Oct 11 14:36
    Aaronontheweb commented #3973
  • Oct 11 01:00
    Horusiath commented #3057
  • Oct 10 20:02
    IgorFedchenko synchronize #3973
  • Oct 10 19:59
    IgorFedchenko synchronize #3973
  • Oct 10 19:58
    IgorFedchenko commented #3973
  • Oct 10 19:53
    IgorFedchenko opened #3973
  • Oct 10 14:04
    stijnherreman commented #3057
  • Oct 10 13:54
    Aaronontheweb commented #3970
  • Oct 10 13:54
    Aaronontheweb synchronize #3970
  • Oct 10 10:10
    Zetanova commented #3937
Aaron Stannard
@Aaronontheweb
the overhead of checking on the first layer of node is going to be the same as routing all the way down to the bottom node
that's how actor selections work
Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
yeah, I have 4-7 layers, each with their own checks
Aaron Stannard
@Aaronontheweb
those checks on whether a child exists or not are very fast
it's a constant time read operation
since it uses a hash
(dictionary)
Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
would it be more efficient to listen to the dead-message queue (somehow?) and notice the target children was not there, init all the actors from A .. G and repost the message?
Aaron Stannard
@Aaronontheweb
you'd have to test it
the dead letters system might end up becoming a bottleneck if you're dealing with message volumes at the level where this is a concern
Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
it would be a bit more reactive, I generally have bursts of messages so if one inits the A..G then the rest of messges will be happy
bugger
Aaron Stannard
@Aaronontheweb
the overhead of checking to see if a child exists is very loiw
Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
your overhead yes, but I have my own checks
Aaron Stannard
@Aaronontheweb
doing that N times won't be too bad - what you should eventually do though is have that leaf node child reply to the sender
and then have the sender and leaf communicate directly after that if there needs to be a "conversation"
that way you only pay for the checks once
since each will hold an actor ref to each other
Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
hm, but then if it dyes ?
Aaron Stannard
@Aaronontheweb
Context.Watch
get a deathwatch notification
and then go back through the hierarchy again
Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
ok .. so there is no way for a parent to monitor the dead-messages for their potential children
Aaron Stannard
@Aaronontheweb
there is, but all dead messages go globally to the same place
Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
yeah, so that was my question, I want to pick/intercept that in the parent not globally
Aaron Stannard
@Aaronontheweb
yeah, not possible to do that
parent can check if the child exists first
before routing the message to it
and that's the preferred way of dealing with it
Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
guys, is there a way to "consolidate" somehow multiple logs based on some correlation id?
"old school" code we used to be able to track multiple logs by the thread-id most of the times, now I get logs from all over the place
Alex Valuyskiy
@alexvaluyskiy

@Aaronontheweb Have you plan to update Persistence providers for 1.0.7? I've already made pull requests for PostgreSql and SqlServer (Akka 2.4.2 compatible) providers
akkadotnet/Akka.Persistence.PostgreSql#20
akkadotnet/Akka.Persistence.SqlServer#24

and created MySql provider
https://github.com/alexvaluyskiy/Akka.Persistence.MySql
Is it possible to move this mysql implementation to akkadotnet github account?

Corneliu
@corneliutusnea
no idea what correlates with wht
Alex Valuyskiy
@alexvaluyskiy
@Aaronontheweb also it would be good to release a new version of Wire serializer, because 0.0.6 version has a lot of bugs
Vagif Abilov
@object
Hello, I just posted a question on SO where I express my unhapinnes about message boxing in F# actors. Here it is:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/36470453/how-should-f-actor-functions-be-defined-to-avoid-message-boxing
I must say while I enjoy Akka.NET F# API and prefer it to C#, this particular aspect looks better in C#.
Bartosz Sypytkowski
@Horusiath
@object why are you boxing them at all?
and are you using Akka.FSharp?
Vagif Abilov
@object
Yes I am using Akka.FSharp. I am boxing to be able to match messages of different types.
Bartosz Sypytkowski
@Horusiath
from my perspective this is usually a problem with handling system messages
unfortunately .NET type system is poor and don't have anything like Ceylon's type unions (don't confuse them with union types)
Vagif Abilov
@object
Exactly. I don't know Ceylon but I believe I understand what you mean and this is what I lack.
So this is partly a design question: is boxing mailbox messages a design smell (except system message case)? And if so, what is the better way? Can't see any better. They all suck :-)
@Horusiath but since your first reaction was "why boxing them at all?" and you work much with F#, does this mean that you avoid this scenario? But how? Putting all cases in the same type?
Bartosz Sypytkowski
@Horusiath
I just don't box them explicitly - I rather use let! (message: obj) = mailbox.Receive ()
optionally in Akkling this shouldn't be necessary, as system messages have active patterns which tells exactly, that pattern match is expected to work on obj value
Vagif Abilov
@object
I see, but it's kind of the same.
Bartosz Sypytkowski
@Horusiath
unfortunately, I haven't found a way to fix that - .NET/F# type system is too limiting for me in this matter
Vagif Abilov
@object
What I experience is that as the system grows and needs to encounter more compex cases, more and more maiboxes lost their strong types.
And your Akkling project doesn't address this?