[erlang-questions] Massive Numbers of Actors vs. Massive Numbers of Objects vs. ????

Miles Fidelman <>
Tue Feb 28 20:19:14 CET 2012


Interesting, though I'm not quite sure the model is directly 
applicable.  It looks like you're modeling buyers/sellers, in a market, 
as transactional mealy machines.  I'm thinking more that the actual 
transactions would be actors/objects - and looking for an environment 
that could handle huge numbers of such entities.  (Or am I misreading 
the reference?).

Miles

Paul Oliver wrote:
> Hi Miles,
>
> Perhaps something like transactional mealy machines? 
> http://scattered-thoughts.net/one/1300/292121/72985
>
> Best,
> Paul.
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Miles Fidelman 
> < <mailto:>> wrote:
>
>     Folks,
>
>     I'm trying to get a handle on core technology for an application
>     that's going to involve massive numbers of entities - where the
>     entities want to have characteristics that draw from both the
>     object and actor models.
>
>     Think of something like massive numbers of stored email messages,
>     where each message is addressable, can respond to events, and in
>     some cases can initiate events - for example, on receiving an
>     email message, a reader can fill in a form, and have that update
>     every copy of the message spread across dozens (or hundreds, or
>     thousands) of mailboxes/folders distributed across the Internet.
>     Or where an email message, stored in some folder, can wake up and
>     send a reminder.
>
>     One sort of wants to blend characteristics of:
>     - messages (small, static, easy to store huge numbers, easy to
>     move around)
>     - objects (data and methods bound together, inheritance, ...)
>     - actors (massive concurrency, active)
>
>     The topic has come up before, in discussions of active objects,
>     reactive objects, concurrent objects, etc. - I'm wondering what
>     the current state of the art and practice look like.
>
>     I'm thinking that Erlang might be nice operating environment for
>     such a beast, but wonder at what point one hits limits in the
>     numbers of actors floating around.  I'm also wondering what other
>     environments might blend these characteristics.
>
>     Thoughts? Comments?
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     Miles Fidelman
>
>     -- 
>     In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>     In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     erlang-questions mailing list
>      <mailto:>
>     http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra





More information about the erlang-questions mailing list