On 13.02.14 16:28, Andreas Berre wrote:
Thanks for your reply,
Point taken regarding ensuring there has been no change in the
aggregate state between command validation and appending derived
events to the journal - but as far as I can tell this only applies if
the EventSourcedProcessor is also the maintainer of the state which
the validation is performed against.
Yes, a processor/actor is a consistency boundary.
If the keeping of this state is delegated to a projection (directly
through views or through messaging) there is no such guarantee?
Right.
If you don't need the guarantees provided by EventsourcedProcessr, think
about using a plain Processor (processing events generated elsewhere) as
Processor may give you a much higher throughput than
EventsourcedProcessor (see batch writes
<http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/2.3.0-RC2/scala/persistence.html#batch-writes>).
-andreas
--
Martin Krasser
blog: http://krasserm.blogspot.com
code: http://github.com/krasserm
twitter: http://twitter.com/mrt1nz
--
Read the docs: http://akka.io/docs/
Check the FAQ: http://akka.io/faq/
Search the archives: https://groups.google.com/group/akka-user
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Akka User List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/akka-user.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
