GitHub user migesok edited a comment on the discussion: Why AsyncWriteJournal.Resequencer is needed?
"very funky classic persistent actor implementations" - that's what I'm dealing with, I believe. We have persistAsync and deferAsync in ungodly combinations. But I can't make it fail in a test even without resequencer which makes me think there is some other built-in mechanism which makes it work. Or I don't understand the type of failures resequencer was made to avert and I'm yet to hit it. My current assumption is that resequencer was meant to keep the order of async callbacks preserved (persist and defer) but they seem to be in order even without it. Even when I deliberately reorder journal actor responses to be in a wrong order. We already have the fix removing resequencer applied locally for some of our projects. I'm trying to understand whether it is safe to extend it company-wise and whether it should be contributed to Pekko. For this reason I'm trying to understand the consequences of removing resequencer. GitHub link: https://github.com/apache/pekko/discussions/1881#discussioncomment-13344780 ---- This is an automatically sent email for notifications@pekko.apache.org. To unsubscribe, please send an email to: notifications-unsubscr...@pekko.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@pekko.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-h...@pekko.apache.org
