Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Looks cool, but what's the distribution story? I'm not sure I understand the comparisons to Akka without one.


There's lots of case studies on akka in production, and people using are generally happy but also honest about bottlenecks they hit (more than a few thousand messages in message box etc

http://www.addthis.com/blog/2013/04/16/building-a-distribute...

http://marakana.com/s/akka_hammer_scala_nails,1129/index.htm...

http://corp.klout.com/blog/2012/10/scaling-the-klout-api-wit...

http://blog.kreuzverweis.com/uncategorized/moving-from-osgi-...


We intend to provide distribution on top of Galaxy (http://puniverse.github.io/galaxy/).


Is Pulsar + Galaxy + Zookeeper + presumably some new code/project still simpler than Akka? It sounds kind of complicated.


Galaxy doesn't require Zookeeper (it's an optional dependency). And Galaxy isn't there just to support Quasar/Pulsar. It's there to support a distributed, concurrent, consistent in-memory database. Actors are just part of the story.

To simplify, Quasar/Pulsar + Galaxy is, in Erlang parlance, like Erlang + Mnesia or Erlang + Riak (only with a consistent database that assists in parallelization)


Cool, thanks for clarifying pron. Looking forward to giving it a spin!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: