Is Akka actor execution mutexed? - akka

Question

From: https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2013/actors_vs_futures.html
suggests that this is safe:
class FooCounter extends Actor {
var count: Long = 0
def receive = {
case Foo => { count += 1}
case FooCountRequest => { sender ! count }
}
}
Isn't it possible that there will be multiple simultaneous calls to receive, making the value of count uncertain.
My understanding is that the only way this could ever be safe would be if the receive call on this object was made mutex with itself.

Answer 1

The receive method is never called simultaneously by multiple threads. Messages residing in an Actor's mailbox are processed one-at-a-time by the receive method. Multiple other Actors, or functions outside of the ActorSystem, can concurrently enqueue messages to the Actor's mailbox but the ActorSystem eventually orders the messages. From the docs:
Enqueuing happens in the time-order of send operations, which means
that messages sent from different actors may not have a defined order
at runtime due to the apparent randomness of distributing actors
across threads.
The receive method's serial processing is guaranteed by the fact that you never actually get an Actor value (which has a receive) from the ActorSystem. Rather, you only get an ActorRef which does not have receive method:
val actorSystem = akka.actor.ActorSystem()
//not an Actor but an ActorRef
val actorRef : ActorRef = actorSystem actorOf Props[FooCounter]
actorRef.receive(Foo) //COMPILE TIME ERROR!
The only way to "invoke" the receive method is to send a message to the ActorRef:
actorRef ! Foo //non-blocking, enqueues a Foo object in the mailbox
Relating back to your question: the ActorSystem acts as a pseudo-mutex for all Actor instances.
Therefore, the code in your example is absolutely safe and the state will only be accessed by one message at any given time.

Answer 2

Totally agree with Ramon. You can think of it have a mail box outside your house(Actor) and mail are coming to your mail box though your address (ActorRef) and you only have 1 single person at your home to take care your mail one at a time.
Besides, for more functional style and maintain immutability of code. I would do the following instead:
class FooCounter extends Actor {
def _receive(count: Long): Receive = {
case Foo =>
context.become(_receive(count + 1))
case FooCountRequest =>
sender() ! count
}
def receive = _receive(0L)
}
For this simple example, there are no difference between mine and yours. But when system become more complex, my code are less error prone.