Re:No More Callbacks: 10,000 Actors, 10,000 Threads, 10,000 ...
by pron on Wednesday October 16, 2013 @02:26PM
(#6561265)
Quasar is distributed on top of our own IMDG called Galaxy. Our goal is not to give you scalability, but to give you scalability while keeping familiar and simple programming models. There is absolutely no reason not to use Netty with Quasar. In fact, we're doing exactly that in an internal project.
Re:No More Callbacks: 10,000 Actors, 10,000 Threads, 10,000 ...
by cnlwsu on Wednesday October 16, 2013 @02:10PM
(#6561183)
I've setup 1m connections to a Netty service we host a couple years back, its kinda a fun exercise. I would avoid something like hazelcast if want to do something that palatalized. We used terracotta and the entire concept of a shared memory in a distributed system becomes a major headache.
Re:No More Callbacks: 10,000 Actors, 10,000 Threads, 10,000 ...
by ww520 on Wednesday October 16, 2013 @10:07PM
(#6563289)
Can you give some insights on why to avoid Hazelcast or friends for distributed system?
I can give my sample usages. I mainly used it for organizing the cluster automatically, like managing membership, server joining or leaving, maintaining the master server address list. With a distributed hash scheme like Soda, any member server can accept work from any client. Scaling out is very simple, just boot up a machine from an image. It would use Hazelcast to join the cluster and become available.
I also used it for distributing jobs, nice to able to say - queue these jobs and the distributed workers pick them up automatically.
I avoid using it for shared memory stuff, using it like Memcached. That's what Memcached, Redis, and friends are for.
That's 3 years ago. I'm sure more can be handled now, with more memory and more cores.
Bundled Netty with a distributed system like Hazelcast, you can easily scale out to more machines.