Thanks for mentioning the saga technique. To my surprise I had already used it without knowing. That is the first thing that comes in mind in certain situations.
But saga by no means could provide a transaction guaranties. The intermediate state is visible to third party during so called transaction and that ruins isolation. The process may crash midway beyond recover ability. By the time the saga master performs "rollback" the actors in question may update their state dozen times, so rollback operation has no meaning or could not be performed. So no atomicity for saga either. Saga is good to mitigate damage dealt by broken transaction if possible, but it could not provide any guaranties. On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 6:43:38 PM UTC+3, Rafał Krzewski wrote: > > I think you need to look into saga pattern which is actor model analogue > of (distributed) transactions. It has the advantage that the parties > involved in the transaction do not need to be present on the same VM > (cluster node etc.) which is a prerequisite for STM / Agents. > > Cheers, > Rafał > > > -- >>>>>>>>>> Read the docs: http://akka.io/docs/ >>>>>>>>>> Check the FAQ: >>>>>>>>>> http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/current/additional/faq.html >>>>>>>>>> Search the archives: https://groups.google.com/group/akka-user --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Akka User List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to akka-user+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to akka-user@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/akka-user. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
