Replaced Action with Directive in SupervisorStrategy. See #1716
This commit is contained in:
parent
4162372024
commit
2a4418799a
6 changed files with 44 additions and 44 deletions
|
|
@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ For the sake of demonstration let us consider the following strategy:
|
|||
:include: strategy
|
||||
|
||||
I have chosen a few well-known exception types in order to demonstrate the
|
||||
application of the fault handling actions described in :ref:`supervision`.
|
||||
application of the fault handling directives described in :ref:`supervision`.
|
||||
First off, it is a one-for-one strategy, meaning that each child is treated
|
||||
separately (an all-for-one strategy works very similarly, the only difference
|
||||
is that any decision is applied to all children of the supervisor, not only the
|
||||
|
|
@ -53,8 +53,8 @@ that the respective limit does not apply, leaving the possibility to specify an
|
|||
absolute upper limit on the restarts or to make the restarts work infinitely.
|
||||
|
||||
The match statement which forms the bulk of the body is of type ``Decider``,
|
||||
which is a ``PartialFunction[Throwable, Action]``. This
|
||||
is the piece which maps child failure types to their corresponding actions.
|
||||
which is a ``PartialFunction[Throwable, Directive]``. This
|
||||
is the piece which maps child failure types to their corresponding directives.
|
||||
|
||||
Default Supervisor Strategy
|
||||
---------------------------
|
||||
|
|
@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ in the same way as the default strategy defined above.
|
|||
Test Application
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
The following section shows the effects of the different actions in practice,
|
||||
The following section shows the effects of the different directives in practice,
|
||||
wherefor a test setup is needed. First off, we need a suitable supervisor:
|
||||
|
||||
.. includecode:: code/akka/docs/actor/FaultHandlingDocSpec.scala
|
||||
|
|
@ -99,13 +99,13 @@ Let us create actors:
|
|||
.. includecode:: code/akka/docs/actor/FaultHandlingDocSpec.scala
|
||||
:include: create
|
||||
|
||||
The first test shall demonstrate the ``Resume`` action, so we try it out by
|
||||
The first test shall demonstrate the ``Resume`` directive, so we try it out by
|
||||
setting some non-initial state in the actor and have it fail:
|
||||
|
||||
.. includecode:: code/akka/docs/actor/FaultHandlingDocSpec.scala
|
||||
:include: resume
|
||||
|
||||
As you can see the value 42 survives the fault handling action. Now, if we
|
||||
As you can see the value 42 survives the fault handling directive. Now, if we
|
||||
change the failure to a more serious ``NullPointerException``, that will no
|
||||
longer be the case:
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ terminated by the supervisor:
|
|||
:include: stop
|
||||
|
||||
Up to now the supervisor was completely unaffected by the child’s failure,
|
||||
because the actions set did handle it. In case of an ``Exception``, this is not
|
||||
because the directives set did handle it. In case of an ``Exception``, this is not
|
||||
true anymore and the supervisor escalates the failure.
|
||||
|
||||
.. includecode:: code/akka/docs/actor/FaultHandlingDocSpec.scala
|
||||
|
|
@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ The supervisor itself is supervised by the top-level actor provided by the
|
|||
:class:`ActorSystem`, which has the default policy to restart in case of all
|
||||
``Exception`` cases (with the notable exceptions of
|
||||
``ActorInitializationException`` and ``ActorKilledException``). Since the
|
||||
default action in case of a restart is to kill all children, we expected our poor
|
||||
default directive in case of a restart is to kill all children, we expected our poor
|
||||
child not to survive this failure.
|
||||
|
||||
In case this is not desired (which depends on the use case), we need to use a
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue