CODEWITHSUNDEEP
exceptionakkaactor
hami
hami

Reputation: 443

Is try catch in actors always bad practice?

I know excpetion handling in actors should in general be done with a supervisor strategy. But is this valid for all cases?

Example

If I follow the the error handling strategies of akka actors strictly, a supervising actor would have to handle this case.

I would prefer to catch the exception inside the database actor and send to the source actor a message, that something went wrong. Then the source actor could react (registrate to the database and try again).

Is this a good practice? Or is the total actor setup wrong? If a supervisor strategy is preferred, how should it be implemented?

Upvotes: 2

Views: 267

Answers (1)

Konrad 'ktoso' Malawski
Konrad 'ktoso' Malawski

Reputation: 13140

It's perfectly fine to catch exceptions and make them into responses when you feel it's appropriate. I'd recommend using Scala's Try, as in:

Try(dangerousOperation()) match {
  case Success(res) => sender() ! res
  case Failure(ex)  => sender() ! UnableToStoreThingy("reasons...", ex)
}

Or something like that (you can also try.failed.map { ex => doThings(ex) }), depends on your style preference.

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions