Stream Processing for Go

Post by spooneybarger » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:27 PM UTC

strmpnk wrote: post #20

felixgallo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the actor model in Erlang and (recently!) in Pony implements something even better: explicit backpressure by deprioritizing senders to busy mailboxes. The model can do this because it includes the scheduler in its scope, which doesn't happen in CSP.

This was never meant to be a complete solution to back pressure in Erlang and has recently been remove for the next major release: https://github.com/erlang/otp/commit/2e601a2efc19d64ed0628a5... I’ve heard speculation that it really only helped scheduler efficiency and this didn’t apply all that well on SMP schedulers and has finally been removed since non-SMP builds are no longer supported. As for Pony, their actor…

Post by scottlf » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:27 PM UTC

felixgallo wrote: post #17

samuell wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my view and experience, the actor model and the CSP model of Go and others (which is also very similar to Flow-Based Programming (FBP) if using buffered channels), can actually fit together very nicely, with each of them sitting at different abstraction levels: - The actor model for high-level coordination and communication - CSP and/or FBP at the low-level, for high performance processing. The reason for this is…

the actor model in Erlang and (recently!) in Pony implements something even better: explicit backpressure by deprioritizing senders to busy mailboxes. The model can do this because it includes the scheduler in its scope, which doesn't happen in CSP.

Post by Thaxll » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 6:55 PM UTC

Touche wrote: post #12

Wow, Pony! Pony is one of my favorite young languages. It fits a similar niche that Go fits (not saying that either language can't be used for other purposes), in that they both are great for building cli tools with good concurrency primitives. Pony, however, uses the Actor model like Erlang (although the programming model is a bit different). In my opinion this is a superior model for concurrency than goroutines. I…

Post by spooneybarger » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 7:00 PM UTC

Thaxll wrote: post #25

Touche wrote: post #12

Wow, Pony! Pony is one of my favorite young languages. It fits a similar niche that Go fits (not saying that either language can't be used for other purposes), in that they both are great for building cli tools with good concurrency primitives. Pony, however, uses the Actor model like Erlang (although the programming model is a bit different). In my opinion this is a superior model for concurrency than goroutines. I…

I think the lack of support for compiling on other platform is a huge issue for CLI, Go compiles on many platform very very easily it's a one liner and you can do it from any platforms, Pony can't do it. So why would you bother doing CLI on language that don't support that? CLI should be a single binary or having a very minimal runtime that can run anywhere.

Post by pstuart » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 7:03 PM UTC

spooneybarger wrote: post #2

Hi all, I'm the VP of Engineering at Wallaroo Labs. Happy to answer questions. I worked with Andy on this preview release of our Go API. Andy will be on in a while and will also be answering any questions that might come up. We are getting ready to start work on performance tuning soon. We have a lot of work already planned there. If you play around with the Go API, we'd love to hear from you. We need your feedback t…

  func (wordTotals *WordTotals) Update(word string) {
        total, found := wordTotals.WordTotals[word]
        if !found {
            total = 0
        }
        wordTotals.WordTotals[word] = total + 1
  }

  func (wordTotals *WordTotals) Update(word string) {
        wordTotals.WordTotals[word] += 1
  }