3 ms·

Akka is built on top of the JVM which doesn't support fibers (yet: see http://openjdk.java.net/projects/loom/ http://openjdk.java.net/projects/loom/). Akka impl

Akka is built on top of the JVM which doesn't support fibers (yet: see http://openjdk.java.net/projects/loom/ http://openjdk.java.net/projects/loom/). Akka implements its own scheduling atop Java's fork-join thread pool. Fibers at the JVM layer would be faster.

thermodynthrway 8y ago
Similar to Quasar then I assume. I'm sure native fibers would be faster, but bytecode is fairly close to ASM and i don't think the performance difference is large. Benchmarks I've seen for Quasar show no performance difference to regular threads at low paralellism but it can scale much higher Found a great article comparing Akka's Actors vs Quasar http://blog.paralleluniverse.co/2015/05/21/quasar-vs-akka/ http://blog.paralleluniverse.co/2015/05/21/quasar-vs-akka/
stephen123 8y ago
Not only that, its non blocking. Meaning you can have a very small thread pool with great performance. Think 1 thread per core.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
yanslookup 8y ago
Quasar is Loom. Hopefully pron chimes in.
- kjeetgill 8y ago
  Loom is quite a bit different than Quasar, but pron (aka Ron Pressler), is leading the way on both. Loom is essentially Quasar would have loved to have baked into the JVM. It's the solution for the bytecode rewriting hackery and resulting limitations it faced.