Hi guys is there a best-practice to determine when failures should be handled via fault tolerance / supervision versus with a normal message?
*Example*: A user wants to *authenticate* with a username / password. I start a separate actor to handle the authentication (since it might fail). If the user entered wrong credentials, should that idiomatically be represented by an exception that is then handled by the supervisor? Or should that just be a message sent back and handled at a different layer? *To generalize*, I wonder how to best think about when to use the fault tolerance over normal messages. Both approaches could be taken to the extreme (handle all "unexpected" events via exceptions / handle all exceptions via messages). So where is the fine line between them? What could I use to help decide the question in specific cases? The docs seem to encourage putting "risky calculations" into separate actors; but is an authentication with wrong credentials "risky" in that context? Thanks Erik -- >>>>>>>>>> Read the docs: http://akka.io/docs/ >>>>>>>>>> Check the FAQ: >>>>>>>>>> http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/current/additional/faq.html >>>>>>>>>> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/akka-user. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
