3 ms·
In theory the scheduler should be similar to NodeJS and Ractor should be similar to Go if they’re both applied correctly.
by sosodev 6y ago
In theory the scheduler should be similar to NodeJS and Ractor should be similar to Go if they’re both applied correctly.
- cutler 6y agoReally? Can you point me to details supporting this?
- sosodev 6y agoFalcon, an async Ruby webserver, is a good example of scaling Ruby with fiber scheduling https://www.codeotaku.com/journal/2018-06/improving-ruby-concurrency/index#performance https://www.codeotaku.com/journal/2018-06/improving-ruby-con... I'm not sure if Ractor has any real benchmarks yet but it enables genuine parallel Ruby code that communicates through message passing without too much overhead.
- nesarkvechnep 6y agoIsn't Ractor based on the Actor model and not CSP?
- sosodev 6y agoRactor is "actor-like" and looks a bit like a mix of both Elixir/Erlang and Go.
- dmix 6y agoIndeed, anyone who has used actors IRL projects it goes well beyond just isolation and message passing. That’s just the foundation which higher abstractions are built, which is why it’s still comparable to Go/CSP at this level.