▲ | gpderetta 4 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
Unless you have NxN queues across actors[1], which is done on some specialized software but is inherently not scalable, queues will end up being more complex than that. [1] at the very least you will need one queue for each cpu pair, but that's yet another layer of complication. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | __red__ 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Pony schedulers default behaviour is as follows: 1. One scheduler per core. 2. Schedulers run one actor behaviour at a time. 3. When a scheduler has an empty work queue, they will steal work from other schedulers. 4. The number of schedulers will scale up and down with the amount of work (but never more than number of cores). There are various parameters you can change to alter scheduler behaviour should your pattern of use need it. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | alfanerd 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
I think you only need one queue per actor? And then one worker per CPU core? I believe that how Erlang does it, and do millions of actors without any issues... | |||||||||||||||||
|