ReactivePullStrategy

This strategy pre-allocates a buffer of the given size and waits for it to fill up before emitting it downstream.

Additional events are requested only after the buffer is emitted.

This strategy is more efficient than StopAndWait, but less fair. For example if you have a producer that emits a tick every second, with a bufferSize of 10 the consumer will only see events every 10 seconds. Therefore it should be used with a busy source, but for slow producers StopAndWait is a better strategy.

This strategy consumes the elements from a Publisher one by one, with acknowledgement required for each event.

In this mode the consumer must indicate its readiness to receive data after every event and the consumer must wait on that acknowledgement. Technically what this means is that for each element the consumer needs to do a request(1) call.

This could be the same as FixedWindow(1) (see FixedWindow), however internally implementations can optimize for stop-and-wait flow control. For example a buffer is not necessarily required.

Pros and Cons of stop-and-wait strategy:

• the implementation can be simpler
• versus FixedWindow it doesn't have to wait for the buffer to fill up, so it's more fair
• the producer needs to wait for acknowledgement on each event and this is a source of inefficiency

The names of the product elements

The name of the type

Default buffering strategy used when not overridden by a user-defined implicit.