When to use various Akka Mailbox types

Question

I'm trying to understand when and where to use the different built-in Akka mailboxes as well as when it is appropriate to roll your own. However, nowhere on that page does it explain what a "bounded mailbox" actually is, or how it behaves different than an unbounded mailbox. Also, that page categorizes mailboxes as "blocking" vs "non-blocking". And while I have a strong idea of what they mean by this (a message can be sent to a mailbox unless the mailbox is first emptied) I'm not 100% sure that I understand this. So seeing that I have no idea what the docs mean when they categorize a mailbox as bounded or blocking, it's tough for me to tell when I should be using each type.

Also, it seems like it is the default Akka behavior to clear out an actor's mailbox if that actor is restarted. I'd like to prevent this, but not sure if the solution is to use one of these built-in mailbox types (no mention of message persistence is mentioned on this page) or to somehow use persistent actors to accomplish such lossless-ness.

Monolayer

Answer 1

First, if an actor crashes and is restarted you only lose the current message that was being processed and not the entire mailbox.

A bounded mailbox has a limit to the number of messages it can have queued before it starts blocking the sender and not allowing the item if the queue doesn't go down while the sender is trying to put an item on. If you have concerns about memory and you can deal with potential message loss then you might want something like this. An unbounded mailbox has no limit on capacity at all so it could possible suffer memory issues if it gets flooded.

Whether it's bounded or not will affect whether or not it blocks. Blocking is generally not great for performance and should be avoided if the situation does not call for a bounded mailbox. That's why the default mailbox is unbounded; it will yield much better performance than a bounded counterpart.

The single consumer unbounded mailbox will most likely be the fastest because it is optimized to only have one consumer ever taking things off the queue. This means that you can not use a dispatcher that allows an actor instance to steal items from another actor instances mailbox (work distributing/stealing) but if you don't care about that then this mailbox might be the best bet for performance.

The priority based mailboxes allow you to provide code that allows the placement within the queue to vary depending on some attributes on the messages itself. This allows you to define the priority of the messages yourself and this will then shift higher priority items to the front of the queue regardless of the normal FIFO rules.

Wreckfish