I've got an chatbot app where I want to send one message e.g. res.json("Hello") from express, then another message later e.g. res.json("How are you doing"), but want to process some code between the two.
My code seems to have some problems with this, because when I delete the first res.json() then the second one works fine and doesn't cause any problems.
Looking in my heroku logs, I get lots of gobbledy gook response from the server, with an IncomingMessage = {}, containing readableState and Server objects when I include both of these res.json() functions.
Any help would be much appreciated.
HTTP is request/response. Client sends a request, server sends ONE response. Your first res.json() is your ONE response. You can't send another response to that same request. If it's just a matter of collecting all the data before sending the one response, you can rethink your code to collect all the data before sending the one response.
But, what you appear to be looking for is "server push" where the server can send data to the client continually whenever it wants to. The usual solution for that is a webSocket connection (or socket.io which is built on top of webSocket and adds more features).
In the webSocket/socket.io architecture, the client makes a connection the server and the connection is kept open indefinitely. Then either side of the connection can send messages to the other end. This is most useful when the server wants to "push" data to the client at any time. In this case, the client establishes the connection, then the server can send data to the client over that connection at any time. The client registers a listener for incoming messages and will be notified anytime the server sends it some data.
Both webSocket and socket.io are fully supported in modern browsers and in node.js. I would personally recommend using socket.io because some of the features it adds (a messaging layer, auto-reconnect, etc...) are very useful.
To use a continuously connected socket like this, you will have to make sure your hosting infrastructure is properly configured to allow it.
res.json() always sends the response to the client immediately (calling it again will cause an error). If you need to gradually build up a response then you can progressively decorate a plain old javascript object; for example, appending items to an array. When you are done call res.json() with the constructed response.
But you should post your code so we can see what's happening.
Related
I have a structure where an application sends a POST request, the API handles the parameters and enters them into the database then another application that is supposed to run a function when the POST request was handled. The only issue I'm having is how can I make the 2nd application know when the request was handled other than running a GET request on a time interval?
Another explanation:
Client A: POSTs data
API: Handles data
Client B: GETs and displays data to user
How can I tell Client B when to do the GET request?
This is all in node.js and using express
What you need is to push data to clients when something happens server-side. This can be achieved by either server side events (which do exactly this), or websockets which create a bidirectional communication channel between server and client. Which one to choose? Check out this stack overflow post.
I'm creating a chat application, and one detail is that "acknowledgements" are crucial. I'll get to what that means. I'm trying to figure out what the best exchange protocol would be.
Scenario:
Alice sends Bob a message. Bob is offline, so the message is stored on the server. Bob connects to the server through a WebSocket connection. The server sends him messages that have been sent to him while he was away. This is where the problem arises. The WS API that's available for my app's ecosystem (Node.js, Nest.js specifically), has no pattern where it can wait for this message to be sent. The mechanism there seems to just be fire & forget. What if the payload is quite large and the connection drops while the message is being sent?
Now, I know socket.io has support for acknowledgements. But from what I've read, socket.io has some overhead and therefore less performance than optimal. Now whether that performance is something that I arguably need is another question, but I'm just trying to figure out how I can guarantee that the message has arrived on the other end. This means client-server and server-client directions. How can I await it? I know that one approach is to attach a unique ID to the socket event, and have the other side send you a confirmation that it received it. This is how socket.io does it if I'm not mistaken.
But my question there is how can I guarantee that the acknowledgement message was successfully sent? So then I'd need an "ack" for my "ack" and so on, so I'll always need one more acknowledgement so I don't know how that works.
What I though of as options is to use two REST endpoints to send and receive (or download) messages. You send when you send, but you receive when you receive a ping that there's messages for you to download. Now this could be done through a WebSocket connection where the server notifies the client about a new message and then the client can call this receive endpoint. This ping can also be done through a more managed solution like FCM. The pros with that approach are twofold:
First, I have the REST interface to use, which is a lot more practical
I have the Request-Response pattern to use, so I have a theoretical guarantee that things are arriving if I get a response
Now the problem with this approach is that there's a lot of overhead from opening a new HTTP connection every time I want to send or receive messages, if I'm not mistaken:
I have to wait for the initial request time to get to the server before I actually have to wait for the server to respond with messages. With the pure WebSockets case, I would theoretically then just wait for the response equivalent part there (?)
This wastes bandwidth as well.
So one more question, where can I find out which clients will actually re-use an existing HTTP connection like a WebSocket connection, if available and not create a new one? Do all clients do that? Is it only the browser? What about apps? Is it on the OS level?
So the final question is how do I solve this problem of "acknowledgements" and not waste time and bandwidth? Are any of my conclusion/questions wrong or uninformed, am I missing something?
Notes:
server is Node.js and client is Flutter
i know about the WAMP subprotocol, but for my ecosystem it doesn't have very reliable implementations
I'm not sure what your exact requirements or performance need,
but I did a project that also need reliable communication between client and server using websocket, the simplest I could think of was build request-response mechanism on top of websocket, and then build your application data on top of that.
here's high level overview how I implemented it:
implement request-response message using transaction to identify which response belongs to which request.
clients will have map storing transaction, when you send the message request wait for server to send a message response with the same transaction or wait
until timeout.
client wants to send message to server and construct the request as follow
{
"event": "sendMessage",
"type": "request",
"transaction": "<uuid/unique-value>",
"data": "<your-application-data>"
}
server parse the message and check that its a request with an event name sendMessage then call related function
server sends back response message to client
{
"event": "sendMessage",
"type": "response",
"transaction": "<uuid/unique-value>", // same unique value as in request
"data": "<your-application-data-result>"
}
because client has mapping which transaction belongs to which request, it is possible to match which request this response belongs to, if matched then complete the transaction
I wonder how do I use socket.io properly with my express app.
I have a REST API written in express/node.js and I want to use socket.io to add real-time feature for my app. Consider that I want to do something I can do just by sending a request to my REST API. What should I do with socket.io? Should I send request to the REST API and send socket.io client the result of the process or handle the whole process within socket.io emitter and then send the result to socket.io client?
Thanks in advance.
Question is not that clear but from what I'm getting from it, is that you want to know what you would use it for that you cant already do with your current API?
The short answer is, well nothing really.. Websockets are just the natural progression of API's and the need for a more 'real-time' interface between systems.
Old methods (and still used and relevant for the right use case) is long polling where you keep checking back to the server for updated items and if so grab them.. This works but it can be expensive in terms of establishing a connection, performing a lookup, then closing a connection.
websockets keep that connection open, allowing both the client and server to communicate real time. So for example, lets say you make an update to your backend data and want users to get that update, using long polling you would rely on each client to ping back to the server, check if there is an update and if so grab it. This can cause lags between updates, some users have updated data while other do not etc.
Now, take the same scenario with websockets, you make an update to the backend data, hit submit, this then emits to your socket server. Socket server takes the call, performs the task ( grabs updated data ) and emits it to the users, each connected user instantly gets that update.
Socket servers are typically used for things like real time chats or polling where packets are smaller but they are also used for web games etc. Depending on the size of your payloads will determine how best to send data back and forth because the larger the payload the more resources / bandwidth it will take on the socket server so its something to consider.
I'm trying to have 2 servers communicate with each other, I'm pretty new to websockets so its kind of confusing. Also, just to put it out there, i'm not trying to do this: websocket communication between servers;
My goal here is to basically use a socket to read data from another server (if this is possible?) I'll try to easily explain more below;
We'll assume there is a website called https://www.test.com (going to this website returns an object)
With a normal HTTP request, you would just do:
$.get('https://www.test.com').success(function (r) {
console.log(r)
})
And this would return r, which is an object thats something like this {test:'1'};
Now from what I understand with websockets, is that you cannot return data from them because you don't actually 'request' data, you just send data through said socket.
Since I know what test.com returns, and I know all of the headers that i'm going to need, is it possible to just open a socket with test.com and wait for that data to be changed without requesting it?
I understand how client-server communication works with socketio/websockets im just not sure if its possible to do server-server communication.
If anyone has any links to documentation or anything trying to help explain, it would be much appreciated, I just want to learn how this works. (or if its even possible)
Yes, I you can do what (assuming I understood your needs correctly). You can establish a websocket connection between two servers and then either side can just send data to the other. That will trigger an event at the other server and it will receive the sent data as part of that event. You can do this operation either direction from serverA to serverB or vice versa or both.
In node.js, everything is event driven. So, you would establish the webSocket connection and then just set up an event handler to be triggered when data arrives. The other server can then just send new data whenever it has updated data to send. This is referred to as the "push" model. So, rather than serverA asking serverB is it has any new data, you establish the webSocket connection and serverB just sends new data to serverA whenever that new data is available. Done correctly, this is both more efficient and more timely (as there is no polling interval and no cycles wasted asking for data when there is nothing new).
The identical model can be used between servers or client to server. The only difference with the client/server model is that the webSocket must be initially established client to server. With the server to server model, either server can initiate the connection.
You can think of a webSocket connection like establishing a phone call. Once the phone call is established, either side can just say something and the other end hears what they're saying. The webSocket connection is similar. Once its established, either side can just send some data to the other end and the other end will receive it. It's an open pipeline ready to have data sent either way. In node.js, when data arrives on that pipeline, it triggers and event so the listener will get that event and see the data that was sent.
I have a nodejs app, and every client has an open socket connection, the reason i am using sockets because I need to update the data on the client whenever the data in the database changes by an external process.
However every other operation in my app doesn't require a socket connection and mostly initiated by the client (CRUD operations), But i am confused about one thing since I always have an open socket connection, wouldn't it be better to use that socket connection for every operation and make the app with pure socket logic?
When using websockets maybe it's fine. But if socket.io switches to XHR (AJAX) transport it might be irrational.
Take a look at the differencies of these two approaches:
In case of simple AJAX (without socket.io) when you want to get some info from server, or change something on a server, you send GET or POST request,
and server responses. Everything's fine.
But in case of socket.io (XHR transport) there is one request to send data, and another to get the response.
(You can make your own experiment - write io.set('transports', ['xhr-polling']); and try to send data to the server and make server respond -
you will see 2 AJAX requests in the Network tab)
So instead of one AJAX request socket.io makes two requests.
This is not because socket.io is bad. This is a feature of sockets approach. This approach is good if you want one side (client or server) to send messages independenly from the other. This is what socket.io does very good.
But if you want to do "request-response" stuff it's the best to use simple AJAX because of traffic economy (note that I compare simple AJAX to socket.io AJAX. Websockets - is another story).
But since this question is about approaches and can't have 100% "yes" or "no" answer, there are might be different opinions.
Sorry for English. I tried to write as clearly as I could :)