Yea, send uses a fixed threadpool, and send-off uses a growing one, so it's more suitable for IO-bound tasks. I don't think there's any difference in terms of how it looks from STM.
2 agents will have 2 independent queues, even though they might share threadpools, if you want to guarantee order, you need one queue. On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Hussein B. <[email protected]> wrote: > I think send-off is used for IO operations, or? > > If an agent is started with messages [1 2 3] and then another agent > started with messages [4 5] , is it guaranteed that messages [1 2 3] will > be delivered before [4 5]? > > I'm talking about production and really concurrent system. > > > On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:45:52 PM UTC+2, Gary Trakhman wrote: > >> Agent send operations inside a transaction get queued up and don't >> actually get sent until the transaction commits, that's probably what you >> want, it's meant for side-effects. >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Hussein B. <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have a ServerSocket that stores the client ID and the client socket >>> object into a ref type. And I also have a thread that is running in the >>> background that checks if a specific condition is met, then it will start >>> send notifications to the clients (it will use the client-id-ref and >>> messages-ref). >>> >>> Of course, since both are refs; any operation needs to be run under a >>> STM transaction. >>> >>> My question is, is it ok to do IO Socket operation inside a STM >>> transaction? STM transaction might retry, this means that there are great >>> chances that the clients will receive the notifications more than once. >>> >>> For Socket IO operations inside STM transaction, is better/recommended >>> to do it using Agents? Since, AFAIK, agents inside a transaction will be >>> executed only if the transaction is successful. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Clojure" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >>> >>> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >>> your first post. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> [email protected] >>> >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Clojure" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
