bastion VS smol

How is this better / different than https://github.com/bastion-rs/bastion ?

There are attempts to implement an Erlang/BEAM-inspired reactor/runtime/executor/ecosystem for Rust's Async, in particular Bastion. (There are also Lumen, Lunatic and Async-Backplane/Async-Supervisor.)

I would be interested in an example showing how to build a robust runtime like bastion with fault tolerance.

But the issue you're referring to, building a fault-tolerant web server where you can have granular control over killing background jobs regardless if they're blocked on a syscall, totally requires using this kind of software architecture. See Bastion.

Bastion, a Rust async runtime inspired by the beam distribution and supervision model

I don't really know much about erlang, but I think this may be along the lines of what you are thinking of: https://github.com/bastion-rs/bastion

(I also don't really think the linux kernel people would be interested...)

This reminds me of bastion. Looks like it attempts to fulfill the same needs, though I guess Lunatic has native WASM support whereas bastion might require some tweaking to have it work? Haven't worked with bastion, so that part of harder time with WASM is just a wild speculation. On the other hand bastion looks much more mature. Probably /u/vertexclique could give a more informed opinion about the difference between the two ;) I really like what these projects are putting forward.

My understanding is you always need a runtime, somethings needs to drive the async flow. But there are others on the market, just not without the.. market domination... of tokio.

https://github.com/smol-rs/smol looks promising simply for being minimal

https://github.com/bytedance/monoio looks potentially easier to work with than tokio

https://github.com/DataDog/glommio is built around linux io_uring and seems somewhat promising for performance reasons.

I haven't played with any of these yet, because Tokio is unfortunately the path of least resistance. And a bit viral in how it's infected tings.

There is also https://github.com/smol-rs/smol which has components which you can compose into your own executor if you still need async IO but your usage patterns don't fit into the general purpose ones that Tokio provides.

If you need precise control over scheduling, consider building something on top of https://github.com/smol-rs/smol

Tokio is a "take what you need" framework, whilst Async-std started as an "everything the box" solution. Today both have a lot of crossover with micro async runtimes like smol becoming the foundation one of framework and optionally usable in the other. The ability to rip out a small dependent sub-crate (dependent package) like smol and use it independently with ease never get's boring, by the way. It's great way to include a test runtime in an async library without forcing the inclusion of a giant async framework.

Helix uses tokio. smol might be a good alternative however.

No, still active on GitHub. What gave you that idea? https://github.com/smol-rs/smol

Found the issue in Google cache. I'm not sure it's really fair of me to post this link here, but equally I think it's better to give the actual text rather than leave it vague.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PRjMyv...