Re: [akka-user] Best practice for communicating with a cluster: client vs direct membership

2015-08-16 Thread Patrik Nordwall
A ClusterClient (outside the cluster) will talk to a ClusterReceptionist on one node (in the cluster). All messages sent via that client instance will be sent to the same ClusterReceptionist. The ClusterReceptionist will then route the messages to destination actors (in the cluster). Replies are se

Re: [akka-user] Best practice for communicating with a cluster: client vs direct membership

2015-08-15 Thread Johan Andrén
If there are many actor instances in the cluster with the same actor path the message will be delivered to a randomly selected one, but you can specify that the receptionist should prefer ones that are in the same cluster node, so if you run one of the backend workers in each of the cluster nod

Re: [akka-user] Best practice for communicating with a cluster: client vs direct membership

2015-08-14 Thread tigerfoot
aaand this is getting to the heart of my question. If all the nodes (RESTful front-end and logic back-end) all belong to the cluster as "first-class members" I can have listeners on each so I basically know all the nodes in the cluster. That way the RESTful nodes can use random/round-robin routi

Re: [akka-user] Best practice for communicating with a cluster: client vs direct membership

2015-08-12 Thread Carsten Saathoff
Hi, I agree that it strongly depends on your application. But it is an aspect that one should consider when planning the architecture, that's why I mentioned it. best Carsten Am Mittwoch, 12. August 2015 10:40:20 UTC+2 schrieb Heiko Seeberger: > > Carsten, > > I don’t think your argument is v

Re: [akka-user] Best practice for communicating with a cluster: client vs direct membership

2015-08-12 Thread Heiko Seeberger
Carsten, I don’t think your argument is valid for a typical frontend/backend grouping of a cluster where you have N frontend (HTTP) nodes and M backend nodes. Assuming you use a reasonable strategy to distribute backend actors across the M backend nodes, e.g. by using a cluster aware router or

Re: [akka-user] Best practice for communicating with a cluster: client vs direct membership

2015-08-10 Thread Heiko Seeberger
Hi, AFAIK the cluster client uses normal actor messaging from the client to the cluster client to the distr-pub-sub to the final destination. No magic knowledge in the cluster client that allows for direct communication. As you probably won’t have 1000s of REST-nodes, I would make these part of

[akka-user] Best practice for communicating with a cluster: client vs direct membership

2015-08-10 Thread tigerfoot
Hello, I'm trying to understand the best way to interact with a cluster. For the sake of conversation let's say I have a load-balanced tier of Akka HTTP servers hosting REST endpoints. These endpoints will in turn send async or sync messages to other actors within a cluster of back-end logic