You are right. I'm aware I do not need to worry about blocking - since everything get amortized to any possible detail by EVM. But what I was concerned if the mailbox might get saturated. Thanks for the suggestions!
On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 6:34:07 PM UTC+4:30, OvermindDL1 wrote: > > If you mean that it bottlenecks communication with it, yes, the mailbox > can kind of be treated like a 'mutex'. Depending on how you are operating > on the data and how it can be referenced then a pool of these managed by a > supervisor (or library like poolboy) or operating on multiple messages at > once inside the process or even raising it into ETS with a library for > operating on the data within ETS can be significantly faster. However a > good bottleneck can help in many cases as well (most I dare say) so it > depends on the use-case as to whether you want it or not. > > TL;DR: A process generally operates on one message at a time, but there > are alternative methods. > > On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 3:33:30 AM UTC-6, Kaveh Shahbazian wrote: >> >> (Noob Here) - >> >> Is a statefull process a bottleneck? (Not exactly; because of the >> Mailbox) Like a `mutex` in more traditional languages? >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elixir-lang-talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-talk/c357fbe2-6b70-4cea-8d57-fe47672aaad9%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
