Message Passing vs Shared Memory
Wisdom90 <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | alt.comp.lang.borland-delphi |
|---|---|
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hello... Read this: 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.