Pony – High Performance Actor Programming

Re:Pony – High Performance Actor Programming by xjia on Sunday May 03, 2015 @07:06PM (#9483432)

Any research paper or documentation on "That guarantee is achieved with no runtime cost"?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pony – High Performance Actor Programming by lostcolony on Sunday May 03, 2015 @07:54PM (#9483579)

Especially if they're trying to include distribution (per a comment elsewhere). Pretty sure you can't have linearalizable messages between nodes without additional runtime cost compared to the non-linearalized case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pony – High Performance Actor Programming by AnkhMorporkian on Monday May 04, 2015 @11:52AM (#9486923)

Distribution probably (almost definitely) kills the runtime cost, I can't imagine how it couldn't. I'm much more interested in the causality guarantee in the context of the distributed systems.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pony – High Performance Actor Programming by lostcolony on Monday May 04, 2015 @08:25PM (#9490173)

Oh, agreed. But it's doable, provided you don't mind losing availability (which is...an interesting choice for a programming language), and you don't mind the runtime cost.

But I agree, exactly what guarantees they're trying to provide (and is it opt in?) is an interesting question.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pony – High Performance Actor Programming by kaeluka on Monday May 04, 2015 @02:07PM (#9487901)

I found: Clebsch, S., & Drossopoulou, S. (2013). Fully Concurrent Garbage Collection of Actors on Many-core Machines. ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, 553–570. http://doi.org/10.1145/2509136.2509557

See p558, "Example 3"

[ Parent | on HN ]