I have an existing API which returns a Future. Now introducing an Actor for one of the use cases and trying to continue using same service API from it. From below you can see MyService.saveValues return future.
object MyActor {
implicit val ec = scala.concurrent.ExecutionContext.Implicits.global
implicit val timeout = Timeout(1 second)
case class SampleMessage(list: List[String])
val actorSystem = //get actorSystem that was created at the startup
def saveMessage(list: List[String]) ={
val res = (actorSystem.actorOf(Props[MyActor]) ? SaveMyMessage(list) ).mapTo[Future[\/[Throwable,String]]
//res map{ r=>
//}
}
}
class MyActor extends Actor {
import MyActor._
def receive = {
case SaveMyMessage(list) =>
val originalSender = sender
val res : Future[\/[Throwable,String] ] = MyService.saveValues(list)
originalSender ! res
}
}
As you can see in def saveMessage I am using ask to wait for a result from an actor. However ask also creates its own future so result (val res) in saveMessage becomes Future[Future[T]] which looks annoying. What's the best way to deal with this scenario?
pipeTo forwards the result of a Future to an ActorRef.
import akka.pattern.pipe
val originalSender = sender
val res : Future[\/[Throwable,String] ] = MyService.saveValues(list)
res pipeTo originalSender
If saveValues throws, your future never complete and will end up timing something out though.
If you ever end up with Future[Future[A]], but want Future[A] as a result of sequencing/traversing or something, you can always "flatMap that shit."
import ExecutionContext.Implicits.global
val foo: Future[Future[Int]] = ???
val bar: Future[Int] = foo.flatMap(identity)
If you already depend on scalaz (and scalaz.contrib if on scalaz 7.0.x), you can use join defined in monad syntax.
import scalaz.syntax.monad._
import scalaz.contrib.std.scalaFuture._
val bar2: Future[Int] = foo.join
Related
Assume I have three methods in an Akka actor that I need to invoke from an actor client:
class MyActor extends Actor {
def receive = {
case req1: Request1 => sender ! method1()
case req2: Request2 => sender ! method2()
case req3: Request3 => sender ! method3()
}
}
I need to invoke these methods in different combinations, for example:
method1, method2
method3
method1, method2, method3
I could have in the client the following method to invoke method1:
def invokeMethod1 () {
val system = ActorSystem("system")
implicit val timeout = Timeout(120 seconds)
val actor = system.actorOf(Props[MyActor], name = "myactor")
val future = actor ? Request1
val result = Await.result(future, timeout.duration)
}
What is the best strategy to invoke methods in different combinations? should I have a invokeMethod1, invokeMethod2 and invokeMethod3 (note that each one initializes the actor system)? Or should I combine in the actor itself the methods, for example method1and2? Is there any other preferred way?
i recommend use to for-loop ,
def invokeMetod1:Future[Int] = ???
def invokeMetod2:Future[Int] = ???
def invokeMetod3:Future[Int] = ???
val a =
for{
_1 <- invokeMetod1
_3 <- invokeMetod3
_2 <- invokeMetod2
}yield
_1 + _2 + _3
it can sequential execution (invokeMetod1 and then invokeMetod3 and then invokeMetod2)
I have the following code that I need to run around 100 times:
val system = ActorSystem("mySystem")
val myActorObject = system.actorOf(Props[MyActorClass], name = "myactor")
implicit val timeout = Timeout(60 seconds)
val future = myActorObject ? Request1
val result = Await.result(future, timeout.duration)
Question is: assuming the first two statements can be called just once, should I cache these variables or Akka does it?
Do not make the actor system creation and actor creation part of repetitive code. Once the actor is created. Using the ActorRef can be done as many times as possible.
val system = ActorSystem("mySystem")
val myActorObject = system.actorOf(Props[MyActorClass], name = "myactor")
Something like this
val futureList = for(_ <- 1 to 1000) yield {
implicit val timeout = Timeout(60 seconds)
val future = myActorObject ? Request1
}
val finalF = Future.sequence(futureList)
val result = Await.result(future, timeout.duration)
In play! (+2.5.x) you can get the system by injection. e.g.
#Singleton
class MyController #Inject() (system: ActorSystem) extends Controller {
val myActor = system.actorOf(MyActorClass.props, "myactor")
//...
}
Then you could have an end point to call the actor as many times as you want, for example
def sayHello(name: String) = Action.async {
(myActor ? name).map { message => Ok(message) }
}
The code inside your actor could be something like this
class MyActorClass extends Actor {
def receive = {
case name: String => sender() ! s"hello $name"
}
}
object MyActorClass {
def props: Props = Props(classOf[MyActorClass ])
}
In my actor I have two requests at different addresses like this:
http.singleRequest(HttpRequest(uri = encodedUri).addHeader(Accept(MediaTypes.`application/json`)))
I need that these two requests return both a value. As normal futures I would expect something like this:
val response: Future[SomeData] = for {
r1 <- firstRequest
r2 <- secondRequest
} yield {
// merge the results of these two responses
}
response onComplete {
case Success(body) => sndr ! Something(body)
case Failure(message) => BadRequest(message.toString)
}
In this part of the documentation:
http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/2.4/scala/http/client-side/request-level.html
It is suggested to use pipeTo to self to manage the single request, instead of using native onComplete/map/etc.
How can I apply that for multiple requests like in my case, where I need to wait for 2 or more to be completed?
Simple and straight foward
val f1 = Future { //request1 }
val f2 = Future { //request2 }
val resultF = f1 zip f2
resultF pipeTo self
Current actor will get the result as a message and message will be a tuple (f1Result, f2Result)
if result resultF fails current actor gets failure message wrapped in akka.actor.Status.Failure
In the method f1 and f2 are independent futures
In case f2 depends on the value of f1 use flatMap
val resultF = f1.flatMap { f1Result => createF2(f1Result) }
//alternatively we can use for comprehension
resultF pipeTo self
Example
import akka.actor.Actor
import akka.actor.Status.Failure
import scala.concurrent.Future
import akka.pattern.pipe
object ManagerActor {
case object Exec
}
class ManagerActor extends Actor {
import ManagerActor._
implicit val dispather = context.dispatcher
override def receive: Receive = {
case Exec =>
val f1 = Future { 1 }
val f2 = Future { 2 }
val resultF = f1 zip f2
resultF pipeTo self
case result: (Int, Int) => //be careful about type erasure
println(s"""result:$result""")
case Failure(th) =>
println(s"""msg: ${th.getMessage}""")
}
}
to run
object Main {
def main(args: Array[String]): Unit = {
val system = ActorSystem()
val actor = system.actorOf(Props[ManagerActor])
actor ! ManagerActor.Exec
Thread.sleep(1000000)
}
}
We can use Future.sequence instead to zip to generalise this to any number of http requests.
I need to create an akka.stream.scaladsl.Source[T, Unit] from a collection of Future[T].
E.g., having a collection of futures returning integers,
val f1: Future[Int] = ???
val f2: Future[Int] = ???
val fN: Future[Int] = ???
val futures = List(f1, f2, fN)
how to create a
val source: Source[Int, Unit] = ???
from it.
I cannot use Future.sequence combinator, since then I would wait for each future to complete before getting anything from the source. I want to get results in any order as soon as any future completes.
I understand that Source is a purely functional API and it should not run anything before somehow materializing it. So, my idea is to use an Iterator (which is lazy) to create a source:
Source { () =>
new Iterator[Future[Int]] {
override def hasNext: Boolean = ???
override def next(): Future[Int] = ???
}
}
But that would be a source of futures, not of actual values. I could also block on next using Await.result(future) but I'm not sure which tread pool's thread will be blocked. Also this will call futures sequentially, while I need parallel execution.
UPDATE 2: it turned out there was a much easier way to do it (thanks to Viktor Klang):
Source(futures).mapAsync(1)(identity)
UPDATE: here is what I've got based on #sschaef answer:
def futuresToSource[T](futures: Iterable[Future[T]])(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Source[T, Unit] = {
def run(actor: ActorRef): Unit = {
futures.foreach { future =>
future.onComplete {
case Success(value) =>
actor ! value
case Failure(NonFatal(t)) =>
actor ! Status.Failure(t) // to signal error
}
}
Future.sequence(futures).onSuccess { case _ =>
actor ! Status.Success(()) // to signal stream's end
}
}
Source.actorRef[T](futures.size, OverflowStrategy.fail).mapMaterializedValue(run)
}
// ScalaTest tests follow
import scala.concurrent.ExecutionContext.Implicits.global
implicit val system = ActorSystem()
implicit val materializer = ActorMaterializer()
"futuresToSource" should "convert futures collection to akka-stream source" in {
val f1 = Future(1)
val f2 = Future(2)
val f3 = Future(3)
whenReady {
futuresToSource(List(f1, f2, f3)).runFold(Seq.empty[Int])(_ :+ _)
} { results =>
results should contain theSameElementsAs Seq(1, 2, 3)
}
}
it should "fail on future failure" in {
val f1 = Future(1)
val f2 = Future(2)
val f3 = Future.failed(new RuntimeException("future failed"))
whenReady {
futuresToSource(List(f1, f2, f3)).runWith(Sink.ignore).failed
} { t =>
t shouldBe a [RuntimeException]
t should have message "future failed"
}
}
Creating a source of Futures and then "flatten" it via mapAsync:
scala> Source(List(f1,f2,fN)).mapAsync(1)(identity)
res0: akka.stream.scaladsl.Source[Int,Unit] = akka.stream.scaladsl.Source#3e10d804
One of the easiest ways to feed a Source is through an Actor:
import scala.concurrent.Future
import akka.actor._
import akka.stream._
import akka.stream.scaladsl._
implicit val system = ActorSystem("MySystem")
def run(actor: ActorRef): Unit = {
import system.dispatcher
Future { Thread.sleep(100); actor ! 1 }
Future { Thread.sleep(200); actor ! 2 }
Future { Thread.sleep(300); actor ! 3 }
}
val source = Source
.actorRef[Int](0, OverflowStrategy.fail)
.mapMaterializedValue(ref ⇒ run(ref))
implicit val m = ActorMaterializer()
source runForeach { int ⇒
println(s"received: $int")
}
The Actor is created through the Source.actorRef method and made available through the mapMaterializedValue method. run simply takes the Actor and sends all the completed values to it, which can then be accessed through source. In the example above, the values are sent directly in the Future, but this can of course be done everywhere (for example in the onComplete call on the Future).
I have example code to generate an unbound source and working with it:
object Main {
def main(args : Array[String]): Unit = {
implicit val system = ActorSystem("Sys")
import system.dispatcher
implicit val materializer = ActorFlowMaterializer()
val source: Source[String] = Source(() => {
Iterator.continually({ "message:" + ThreadLocalRandom.current().nextInt(10000)})
})
source.runForeach((item:String) => { println(item) })
.onComplete{ _ => system.shutdown() }
}
}
I want to create class which implements:
trait MySources {
def addToSource(item: String)
def getSource() : Source[String]
}
And I need use it with multiple threads, for example:
class MyThread(mySources: MySources) extends Thread {
override def run(): Unit = {
for(i <- 1 to 1000000) { // here will be infinite loop
mySources.addToSource(i.toString)
}
}
}
And expected full code:
object Main {
def main(args : Array[String]): Unit = {
implicit val system = ActorSystem("Sys")
import system.dispatcher
implicit val materializer = ActorFlowMaterializer()
val sources = new MySourcesImplementation()
for(i <- 1 to 100) {
(new MyThread(sources)).start()
}
val source = sources.getSource()
source.runForeach((item:String) => { println(item) })
.onComplete{ _ => system.shutdown() }
}
}
How to implement MySources?
One way to have a non-finite source is to use a special kind of actor as the source, one that mixes in the ActorPublisher trait. If you create one of those kinds of actors, and then wrap with a call to ActorPublisher.apply, you end up with a Reactive Streams Publisher instance and with that, you can use an apply from Source to generate a Source from it. After that, you just need to make sure your ActorPublisher class properly handles the Reactive Streams protocol for sending elements downstream and you are good to go. A very trivial example is as follows:
import akka.actor._
import akka.stream.actor._
import akka.stream.ActorFlowMaterializer
import akka.stream.scaladsl._
object DynamicSourceExample extends App{
implicit val system = ActorSystem("test")
implicit val materializer = ActorFlowMaterializer()
val actorRef = system.actorOf(Props[ActorBasedSource])
val pub = ActorPublisher[Int](actorRef)
Source(pub).
map(_ * 2).
runWith(Sink.foreach(println))
for(i <- 1 until 20){
actorRef ! i.toString
Thread.sleep(1000)
}
}
class ActorBasedSource extends Actor with ActorPublisher[Int]{
import ActorPublisherMessage._
var items:List[Int] = List.empty
def receive = {
case s:String =>
if (totalDemand == 0)
items = items :+ s.toInt
else
onNext(s.toInt)
case Request(demand) =>
if (demand > items.size){
items foreach (onNext)
items = List.empty
}
else{
val (send, keep) = items.splitAt(demand.toInt)
items = keep
send foreach (onNext)
}
case other =>
println(s"got other $other")
}
}
With Akka Streams 2 you can use a sourceQueue : How to create a Source that can receive elements later via a method call?
As I mention in this answer, the SourceQueue is the way to go, and since Akka 2.5 there is a handy method preMaterialize which eliminates the need to create a composite source first.
I give an example in my other answer.