Jonas Bonér
Viktor Klang
Peter Veentjer
Peter Vlugter
I should clarify that from the Mongo end there are safe ways to get the desired behavior but not with locking; (we have effective tools for handling ABA, etc). I may evaluate integrating an Akka friendly persistence layer to the Mongo Scala driver (Casbah) to bridge some of the gap created by Akka migrating away from it.
Ive been working lately on ways to improve Akka's Mongo Persistence integration and it is just too hard to make it all fit. This is a growing problem in the NoSQL space.
Frameworks are adding layers that create a unified api on top of all NoSQL containers and as a result we lose much of what is strong about each container. or worse accentuate what is weak. Mongo is not cassandra. Or riak. Or redis. And vice versa.
Treating them all the same is a nightmare on all ends to maintain and I applaud a sound decision here to short circuit this.
As for those who want Mongo+ Akka to play nicely together feel free to contact me: Making Scala and Mongo work together is my dayjob, after all. (By night Im a crime fighting superhero. Or was that a viking? I can never remember)
-b
I agree, any persistence APIs should compliment the underlying storage solution. Not accentuate weak spots and obscure strong points.
On Feb 17, 2011 4:06 AM, "Brendan W. McAdams" <bre...@10gen.com> wrote:I should clarify that from the Mongo end there are safe ways to get the desired behavior but not with locking; (we have effective tools for handling ABA, etc). I may evaluate integrating an Akka friendly persistence layer to the Mongo Scala driver (Casbah) to bridge some of the gap created by Akka migrating away from it.
Ive been working lately on ways to improve Akka's Mongo Persistence integration and it is just too hard to make it all fit. This is a growing problem in the NoSQL space.
Frameworks are adding layers that create a unified api on top of all NoSQL containers and as a result we lose much of what is strong about each container. or worse accentuate what is weak. Mongo is not cassandra. Or riak. Or redis. And vice versa.
Treating them all the same is a nightmare on all ends to maintain and I applaud a sound decision here to short circuit this.
As for those who want Mongo+ Akka to play nicely together feel free to contact me: Making Scala and Mongo work together is my dayjob, after all. (By night Im a crime fighting superhero. Or was that a viking? I can never remember)
-b
On Feb 17, 2011 3:52 AM, "Jonas Bonér" <jo...@jonasboner.com> wrote:
> Dear hakkers.
>
> We have ...
> BackgroundWhen Akka Persistence modules(s) was started it was intended as a
> durable storage for STM, combining the two would give the user ACID, ACI
> from STM and D from th...
> The problemHowever, we have discovered that it gives an illusion of safety
> that is different for each storage and we simply cannot guarantee that it’s
> crash-proof. There ...
> Detailed analysisNo failure atomicity:Placement of the items on the nosql
> store is not atomic. So it could be that when a transaction fails (for
> whatever reason) some of...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Akka User List" grou...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Akka User List" group.
To post to this group, send email to akka...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to akka-user+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/akka-user?hl=en.
Great to hear that, all the feedback I've heard on this topic has been very positive.
On Feb 20, 2011 9:10 AM, "Pekka Mattila" <pe...@starduckstudios.com> wrote:
Great decision. For example, we tried to use Akka's Redis integration
but we faced too many problems with it. Now we are happily using lower
level Api for Redis and everything works like a charm.
Best Regards,
Pekka
On Feb 18, 10:45 am, Raymond Roestenburg
<raymond.roestenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on the decision.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Jonas Bonér <jo...@jonasboner.com> wrote:
> > Dear hakkers.
>
> >...