Normally i use ajax http requests to get/post data. Now i have thoughts like why shouldn't i replace all the ajax get requests with socketIO?is there any disadvantage in following this approach?
I understand that session cookies via http headers will be sent between client and server during every http requests, during client<=>server interactions using sockets, will the session cookies in browser automatically sent to the server via socket headers(if that exists)?
In which usecases should i prefer SocketIO over Http?(if you consider this as a question that demands broad answer then you can link me to some relevant articles)
WebSockets are useful when the server needs to push some real time information to the client about some events that happened on the server. This avoids the client making multiple polling AJAX calls to verify if some event has occurred on the server.
Think of a simple chat application. If the client needs to know if the other participant in a chat session has written something in order to display it, he will need to make AJAX calls at regular intervals to verify this on the server. On the other hand WebSockets allow the server to notify the client when this even occurs, so it is much more efficient in terms of network traffic. Also the WebSockets protocol allows the server to push real time information to multiple subscribed clients at the same time: for example you could have a web browser and mobile application subscribed to a WebSocket and talking to each other directly through the server. Using AJAX those kind of scenarios would be harder to achieve and would require much more stateless HTTP calls.
I understand that session cookies will be sent between client and server during every http requests, is this case the same during client<=>server interactions using sockets
The WebSockets protocol is different from the HTTP protocol. So after the initial handshake occurs (which happens over HTTP), there are no more notion of HTTP specific things such as cookies.
There's one important thing that you should be aware when using WebSockets: it requires a persistent connection to be established between the client and the server. This could make it tricky when you need to load balance your servers. Of course the different implementations of the WebSockets protocol might offer solutions to this problem. For example Socket.IO has a Redis implementation allowing the servers to keep track of connected clients through a cluster of nodes.
Related
In my node.js server app I'm providing a service to my js client that performs some handling of remote api's.
It might very well be possible that two different clients request the same information. Say client 1 requests information, then before client 1's request is fully handled (remote api's didn't returns their response yet) client 2 is requesting the same data. What I'd want to is to wait for client 1 data to be ready and then write it to both client 1 and 2.
This seems to me like a very common issue and I was wondering if there was any library or built-in support in connect or express that supports this issue.
You might not want to use HTTP for providing the data to the client. Reasons:
If the remote API is taking a lot of time to process you will risk the client request to timeout, or the browser to repeat the request.
You will have to share some state between requests which is not a good practice.
Have a look at websockets (socket.io would be a place to start). With them you can push data from the server to the client. In your scenario, clients will perform the request to the server, which will return 202 and when the remote API will respond, the server will push the data to the clients using websockets.
I want to add on an existing project some sockets with nodeJs and Socket.io.
I already have 2 servers :
An API RESTful web service, to storage and manage my datas.
A Public web service to return HTML, assets (js, css, images, ...)
On the first try, I create my socket server on the Public one. But I think it will be better if I create an other one to handle only socket query.
What do you think ? It's a good idea or just an useless who will add more problem than solve (maybe duplicate intern lib, ..)
Also, i'm using token to communicate between Public and API, do I have to create another to communication between socket and API ? Or I can use the same one ?
------[EDIT]------
As nobody didn't understand me well I have create a schema with the infrastructure I was thinking about.
It is a good way to proceed ?
The Public Server and Socket server have to be the same ? Or can be separate ?
Do I must create a socket connection between API and Socket server for each client connected ?
Thank you !
Thanks for explaining better.
First of all, while this seems reasonable, this way of using Socket.io is not the most common one. The biggest advantage of using Socket.io is that it keeps a channel open for 2-way communication. The main advantage of this is that the server itself can send messages to the client without the latter having to poll periodically.
Think, for example, of a mail client. Without sockets, the browser would have to poll periodically to check for new mail. With an open socket connection, instead, as soon as a new mail comes the server notifies the client immediately.
In your case, the benefits could be limited, and I'm not sure the additional complexity of a Socket.io server (and cost!) would really be worth the modest speed improvement on REST requests. However, at the end it's up to you.
In answer to your points
See above
If the "public server" is not written in Node.js they can't be the same application. Wether they reside on the same server, it's up to you and your budget. Ideally they should be separate, for bigger workloads.
If you just want the socket server to act as a real-time proxy, then yes, you'll have to create a socket connection for each request. How that will work is:
The client requests a resource to the Socket.io server.
The Socket.io server does the normal HTTP request to the API server (e.g. using request)
The response is returned to the client over the socket connection
The workflow represented in #3 is the reason why you should expect only moderate performance improvement. Indeed, you'll get some better latency, but most of the overhead for starting a HTTP request is still there!
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 :)
Background: I am building a web app using NodeJS + Express. Most of the communication between client and server is REST (GET and POST) calls. I would typically use AJAX XMLHttpRequest like mentioned in https://developers.google.com/appengine/articles/rpc. And I don't seem to understand how to make my RESTful service being used for Socket.io as well.
My questions are
What scenarios should I use Socket.io over AJAX RPC?
Is there a straight forward way to make them work together. At least for Expressjs style REST.
Do I have real benefits of using socket.io(if websockets are used -- TCP layer) on non real time web applications. Like a tinyurl site (where users post queries and server responds and forgets).
Also I was thinking a tricky but nonsense idea. What if I use RESTful for requests from clients and close connection from server side and do socket.emit().
Thanks in advance.
Your primary problem is that WebSockets are not request/response oriented like HTTP is. You mention REST and HTTP interchangeably, keep in mind that REST is a methodology behind designing and modeling your HTTP routes.
Your questions,
1. Socket.io would be a good scenario when you don't require a request/response format. For instance if you were building a multiplayer game in which whoever could click on more buttons won, you would send the server each click from each user, not needing a response back from the server that it registered each click. As long as the WebSocket connection is open, you can assume the message is making it to the server. Another use case is when you need a server to contact a client sporadically. An analytics page would be a good use case for WebSockets as there is no uniform pattern as to when data needs to be at the client, it could happen at anytime.
The WebSocket connection is an HTTP GET request with a special header requesting the server to upgrade it to a WebSocket connection. Distinguishing different events and message on the WebSocket connection is up to your application logic and likely won't match REST style URIs and methods (otherwise you are replication HTTP request/reply in a sense).
No.
Not sure what you mean on the last bit.
I'll just explain more about when you want to use Socket.IO and leave the in-depth explanation to Tj there.
Generally you will choose Socket.IO when performance and/or latency is a major concern and you have a site that involves users polling for data often. AJAX or long-polling is by far easier to implement, however, it can have serious performance problems in high load situations. By high-load, I mean like Facebook. Imagine millions of people loading their feed, and every minute each user is asking the server for new data. That could require some serious hardware and software to make that work well. With Socket.IO, each user could instead connect and just indefinitely wait for new data from the server as it arrives, resulting in far less overall server traffic.
Also, if you have a real-time application, Socket.IO would allow for a much better user experience while maintaining a reasonable server load. A common example is a chat room. You really don't want to have to constantly poll the server for new messages. It would be much better for the server to broadcast new messages as they are received. Although you can do it with long-polling, it can be pretty expensive in terms of server resources.
Do I need to use a websocket to send JSON data to my client? (it's a tiny session description)
Currently my client-side code sends a session description via XHR to my Node.js server. After receipt, my node server needs to send this down to the other client in the 'room'.
I can achieve this using socket.io, but is it possible to do anything a bit faster/ more secure, like XHR for example?
If you just want to receive the offer from the other side and nothing else, I would suggest you to try HTML5 Server Sent Events.
But this may bring problems due to different browsers support, so I would use a simple long pooling request. Since you only want to get the SDP offer, the implementation is pretty simple.
No, you don't need to use the WebSocket API to send JSON data from client to client via a server, but unless you use Google's proprietary App Engine Channel APIs, then the WebSocket API is probably your best choice.
Also, please keep in mind that you're not only sending session descriptions, but also candidate info (multiple times) as well as other arbitrary data that you might need to start/close sessions, etc.
As far as I know, the WebSocket API is the fastest solution (faster than XHR) for signalling because all the overhead involved with multiple HTTP requests is non-existent after the initial handshake.
If you want to code things yourself, I'd start reading the latest WebSocket draft and learning how to code the WebSocket server-side script yourself or else you will pretty much have to rely on a WebSocket library like Socket.IO or a proprietary solution like Google's App Engine Channel APIs.
How about using the 303 HTTP status code?
The first client send the session description to resource X, the server acknowledges the receipt and responds with a 303 status code that points to a newly created resource Y that accumulates other clients session descriptions.
The first client polls resource X until it changes.
The second client send its session description to resource A, the server acknowledges the receipt and updates resource Y. The first client notices the update with the next poll and will now have the second client's session information.