Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming.threads > #5804

Message Passing vs Shared Memory

Show all headers | View raw

Hello,


Message Passing vs Shared Memory

Read more here:

http://boron.physics.metu.edu.tr/ozdogan/GraduateParallelComputing.old/week8/node9.html


And now about The disadvantages of Actor model:
 
1- Not all languages easily enforce immutability
 
Erlang, the language that first popularized actors has immutability at
its core but Java and Scala (actually the JVM) does not enforce
immutability.
 
 
2- Still pretty complex
 
Actors are based on an asynchronous model of programming which is not so
straight forward and easy to model in all scenarios; it is particularly
difficult to handle errors and failure scenarios.
 
 
3- Does not prevent deadlock or starvation
 
Two actors can be in the state that wait message one from another; thus
you have a deadlock just like with locks, although much easier to debug.
With transactional memory however you are guaranteed deadlock free.
 
 
4- Not so efficient
 
Because of enforced immutability and because many actors have to switch
in using the same thread actors won't be as efficient as lock-based
concurrency.
 

 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

Back to comp.programming.threads | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Message Passing vs Shared Memory aminer68@gmail.com - 2020-06-11 17:18 -0700

csiph-web