Hello,
Some time after upgrading to Akka-HTTP 10.0.3, these errors started
appearing in rare cases, in as yet unknown circumstances.
> Sending an 2xx 'early' response before end of request was received...
> Note that the connection will be closed after this response.
> Also, many clients
> 15 feb. 2017 kl. 22:18 skrev Igor Berman :
>
> Hello All
> Wanted to get a bit of advice regarding following usecase:
> I have local ActorSystem that handles messages with some key inside. Every
> such message causes mutation of db state by the key: read old value by
Hello All
Wanted to get a bit of advice regarding following usecase:
I have local ActorSystem that handles messages with some key inside. Every
such message causes mutation of db state by the key: read old value by key,
compute new state given message, write new value to the db.
To guarantee
http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/2.4.11/scala/http/low-level-server-side-api.html#Stand-Alone_HTTP_Layer_Usage
says "While in most applications this "feature" will not be crucial it can
be useful in certain cases to be able to "run" the HTTP layer (and,
potentially, higher-layers) against data
W dniu środa, 15 lutego 2017 17:12:04 UTC+1 użytkownik
klaus.wie...@gmail.com napisał:
>
> Hi Tal,
>
> thank you for you tip.
>
> The answer to your question is: all the examples I've seen so far use one
> cluster only. You are right, the task itself does not even require the
> manager to be in
Hi Elmar,
could you first update to the latest version of akka-http, 10.0.3? We fixed
a few issues with the connection pool since akka 2.4.7.
Johannes
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 5:12:18 PM UTC+1, Elmar Weber wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> we are observing an issue with akka-http client side
Hello,
we are observing an issue with akka-http client side since a few days. With
additional logging we tracked it down to the part where akka-http sends out
the request, i.e. the client starts the request but we never see it hitting
the target server.
The client pool is set up using the
Hi Tal,
thank you for you tip.
The answer to your question is: all the examples I've seen so far use one
cluster only. You are right, the task itself does not even require the
manager to be in any cluster if there is exactly one manager. So your
answer is very reasonable. I'll soon check it
Hi,
So here's a question - why do you want to have the manager and workers in
the same cluster? If they are, indeed, so decoupled that they should run on
separate machines, why not just have 2 separate clusters (or a cluster for
the workers, and a separate non-cluster process for the manager)?
Hi Rafal,
thank you for your interest. And Yes, I understand the benefits of one
single source. And thats how they do it on the internet tutorials.
But these things get questionable if
1. the managers task of finding out what a worker should do is complicated
in algorithm (and thus in code,
10 matches
Mail list logo