[erlang-questions] Supervisor tree width?
Fri May 30 15:02:39 CEST 2014
I’ll be trivial to say that design of supervisor tree is an application specific.
One lesson learned is that supervision it’s about the guarantees. Take a look into Fred’s post
Personally, I’am splitting an application to smaller functional units with own supervisors per unit.
If an unit design needs 15 children then I see no issue to have them.
However, if 15 children do not have any relations each other then I am combining them to guaranty deterministic application state after failure.
On 30 May 2014, at 14:28, Roger Lipscombe <roger@REDACTED> wrote:
> I'm concerned that the top-level supervisor in one of our applications
> has too many children. It has about 15 children, which are only
> vaguely related to each other.
> What's a good rule-of-thumb for whether a supervisor tree is too wide?
> Or too deep? Or am I thinking on the wrong level here?
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions