Hacker News Reader

Comment by tqwewe | Hacker News Reader

Thanks for the reply! The example you gave does make sense regarding the stage being used with the actors startup method.

I wasn't aware async_trait wasn't needed, thats nice to see.

Also congrats on it being used in such a big company, thats awesome! I have a lot of respect for ractor and appreciate your response

View on HN

Thanks! I'm happy to see actors getting some solid use in the industry to provide better thread-management safety and remove a lot of concurrency headaches.

Question for you, I was poking around in the codebase and how do you handle your Signal priorities? Like if a link died, and there's 1000 messages in the queue already, or if it's a bounded mailbox, would the link died (or even stop) messages be delayed by that much?

Have you looked into prioritization of those messages such that it's not globally FIFO?

Great question, I did some digging into the source code of beam to help answer if signals should have special priority, and the conclusion (with the help of someone else from the elixir community) was that signals have no special priority over regular messages in beam. So I decided to take this same approach, where a regular message is just a `Signal::Message(M)` variant, and everything sent to the mailbox is a signal.

So gracefully shutting down an actor with `actor_ref.stop_gracefully().await` will process all pending messages before stopping. But the actor itself can be forcefully stopped with `actor_ref.kill()`

Reply on news.ycombinator.com