Sure, I will give it a shot.
Thanks for the help.
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:45 PM, Konrad “ktoso” Malawski <
konrad.malaw...@lightbend.com> wrote:
> Seems Durable (filebased) mailboxes weren’t even in 2.3, but 2.2… So even
> more ancient ;-)
> A question regarding them, made me assume you’re usin
Seems Durable (filebased) mailboxes weren’t even in 2.3, but 2.2… So even
more ancient ;-)
A question regarding them, made me assume you’re using those ancient
version of Akka.
Please give Persistence a try. There’s nothing durable mailboxes did better
(or even as good as) Persistence does nowaday
I was never using 2.3, I wrote 2.5.3, probably you misread the figures.
Also, I was looking at Akka persistence as there were some other
discussions in the forum regarding Durable mailbox vs Akka Persistence.
I was looking for the recommended practices only.
On Wednesday, January 3, 2018 at
I would consider Akka Persistence or using Akka Streams with the
Flow.mapAsync function. Either one provides a way to handle your situation
without unlimited threads. Using raw Actors only it will be just a lot of
work and cleverness and wheel re-invention.
Brian Maso
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 2:30
I suspect the reason you're not getting much response is that there *is* no
best practice. This is a very unusual design -- I don't think I've ever
seen it before. In principle, I don't see any reason why it doesn't work,
but you're intentionally stepping outside of Akka's firmest invariant, that
Hello,
I have application in Akka Typed where I have instance of StateActor for
each id (around 1000 instances). Each StateActor accepts 2 messages:
GetState() and SetState(state).
SetState saves its state to db and if that was successful, saves a copy to
local actor cache.
GetState responds w
