Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am building a large web application in node.js and I'm always faced with the question 'where should the heavy lifting be done?' I was always taught that the 'logic' should always be done in the backend of the application, but with modern computers and browsers being so powerful it begs the question if some of the heavy lifting logic can go in the front end.
So context to my specific application. Using angularjs and postgres. A specific question is: would it be a bad practice to have the back end api fetch the rows from the database and pass it to the front end. And then have the front end deal with the logic of deriving the information from the rows? Things like counts with in date ranges and such. (ignore security for this question) or should all the be done on the backend?
If it deals with script that doesn't need to be hidden or is not a secret, then I would suggest putting most of it on the front-end, it would lessen the stress on your server and give you more space to run more processes at a time without filling the ram.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
We are building a platform using microservice-based architecture. We are expecting 500K users in the next two years so for that we are thinking to use below technology stack as below:
Python - Fast API
UI - React SSR (Server Side Rendering)
Here, we found during concurrency analysis that node is faster than Fast API.
We are confused that should we go with nodeJS or Fast API (asyncio). We have more expertise in python so more leaning towards it but we do not want to bias in the selection of technology which later on creates problems for us.
So we need guidance the shall we proceed with Python to handle millions of requests using - Fast API or we should go with node?
Or If you think we can have a better technology option then above then we are open for suggestions.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I am starting an real time "word detecting" game and need a way to communicate with server in real time sending and receiving mostly string data maybe some int and bool too what is the best solution for this ? where should I start my R&D
There are different types of networking solutions. You can have high level/low level apis for networking.
For low level apis you could look into LiteNetLib for unity and for high level apis you could check photon.
Here is a link comparing different networking solutions : Solutions low/high level apis
I would look into types of server aswell. P2p, authoritative server...
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I keep seeing references to JAMstack web development architecture.
From the web page Jamstack.org it is not obvious how JAMstack is different from the common JavaScript SPA frontend with REST API backend architecture.
What is the key difference?
Javascript Heavy front end - APIs for everything else - templated Markup
jamstack.org is the canonical site with examples and explanation
The key thing that differentiates JAMstack from other architectures is the middle part. APIs for every back end function means that backend can be spread out/scaled with ease.
EDIT: I should add that the term was coined by a CDN company Netlify which stands to benefit from a wider adoption of the architecture.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
At the risk of this question being closed I will ask anyway.
I have been looking at the different JavaScript Frameworks as most jobs roles seem to want:
angular.js
Knockout.js
Node.js
Whilst i can see Angualr.js and Knockout.js provides a MVC construct to the markup pages (though still not sure which one is best to use) I cannot see what is the case for node.js?
Whilst I appreciate node.js is good for real-time comms but so is Signalr as they both use long-polling.
At present I use signalr to update images on my clients.
is there any purpose to swapping this out for node.js?
Like I said this question could be voted to be closed as it may seem to be asking an opinion - and that would be an answer to me in itself as it would be down to developer choice but is there a DEFINITIVE reason to use node.js over signalr?
thanks
One reason to use node.js is code redundancy. Both the server and client run the same language, thus they may share a certain part of the codebase, meaning potentially less to write. With libraries like Browserify this process can be made a lot more transparent and writing the client-side can be almost indistinguishable from server-side development. Another opportunity this opens up is both client and server side rendering + MVC setups with, for example, rendr.js. So you can have both the fast load speeds of server-side and responsiveness of client-side rendering. If any of this will be useful naturally depends on what you are developing.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
One of the main features in my website is a simple One-to-One chat.
I'm debating whether or not I shall dedicate a server (or a cluster) for the sole purpose of this chat feature. The simpler option would be combining this feature as part of the web-servers and just scale out when necessary.
It is worth mentioning I'd like in the future to enable images transfer within the chat.
So what is the better option and why?
Well yes, Whether to use another dedicated server is not depending on how much traffic your site will have to handle. If you're dealing with images It will be a good idea to store them in another server and keep the root server clean.