I have been studying web sockets recently and plan to use them in my application even though the app is not realtime. I am mostly doing this because I want to try it out and further down the line it might open more possibilites for the app's functionality. Also I am not bothered about having an API for mobile at the moment but think it would still be possible to have some kind of api over web sockets if I needed it in the future.
However for in-production apps are there any real reasons why somebody would consider implementing websockets if there is no real-time element?
Are there any benefits over HTTP requests other than the real timeness of it?
HTTP requests include the full HTTP headers. Depending on the cookie load, this may reach a couple of KB per request. WebSocket protocol headers are minimal compared to that. If you have a lot of requests and care about bandwidth then going with WebSocket makes sense.
Additionally a HTTP connection is (traditionally) negotiated for each request, which means you have overhead on each request compared to WebSocket, which has persistent connections. Connection establishment takes time (hence the advantage in real-time applications), but it also uses resources on the server. Again, depending on your app's communication patterns, using WebSocket may make sense.
Related
I'm trying to learn Node.js and adequate design approaches.
I've implemented a little API server (using express) that fetches a set of data from several remote sites, according to client requests that use the API.
This process can take some time (several fecth / await), so I want the user to know how is his request doing. I've read about socket.io / websockets but maybe that's somewhat an overkill solution for this case.
So what I did is:
For each client request, a requestID is generated and returned to the client.
With that ID, the client can query the API (via another endpoint) to know his request status at any time.
Using setTimeout() on the client page and some DOM manipulation, I can update and display the current request status every X, like a polling approach.
Although the solution works fine, even with several clients connecting concurrently, maybe there's a better solution?. Are there any caveats I'm not considering?
TL;DR The approach you're using is just fine, although it may not scale very well. Websockets are a different approach to solve the same problem, but again, may not scale very well.
You've identified what are basically the only two options for real-time (or close to it) updates on a web site:
polling the server - the client requests information periodically
using Websockets - the server can push updates to the client when something happens
There are a couple of things to consider.
How important are "real time" updates? If the user can wait several seconds (or longer), then go with polling.
What sort of load can the server handle? If load is a concern, then Websockets might be the way to go.
That last question is really the crux of the issue. If you're expecting a few or a few dozen clients to use this functionality, then either solution will work just fine.
If you're expecting thousands or more to be connecting, then polling starts to become a concern, because now we're talking about many repeated requests to the server. Of course, if the interval is longer, the load will be lower.
It is my understanding that the overhead for Websockets is lower, but still can be a concern when you're talking about large numbers of clients. Again, a lot of clients means the server is managing a lot of open connections.
The way large services handle this is to design their applications in such a way that they can be distributed over many identical servers and which server you connect to is managed by a load balancer. This is true for either polling or Websockets.
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.
I need to track moving cars.
Should I post the location every time the location changes, and send it over the socket?
Or should make a REST API and post the location (from the tracked device) and check it (with the tracker device) every 10 seconds, regardless if the location changed or not?
(The App is being made with React Native)
Building HTTP requests by frequent updates requires more resources then sending messages through websocket. Keeping websocket connections open by a lot of users requires more resources than using HTTP. In my opinion the answer depends on the user count, the update frequency, whether you apply the REST constraints (no server side session) and which version of HTTP you use (HTTP2 is more efficient than HTTP1.1 as far as I know). I don't think this is something we can tell you without measurements.
The same is true if you want to push data from the server to the client. If you do it frequently and the update must be almost immediate, then websocket is probably a better choice than polling. If you do the rarely and the delay (polling frequency) can be a few minutes, then polling might be better.
Note that I am not an expert of load scaling, this is just a layman's logic.
I would use WebSockets. For small deployments and low-frequency updates basically anything works, but with WebSockets you have technology that scales better in the long term. (And no, I would not consider this premature optimization, since the choice of technology here does not mean unnecessary initial overhead.)
Shameless plug: If you're using WebSocket, you could take a look at Crossbar.io - http://crossbar.io, or WAMP (http://wamp-proto.org) in general, which provides messaging mechanisms on top of WebSocket and should work well for you use case. I work for the company which is at the core of this, but it's open source software.
I am developing a node/express RESTful server with normal routes and HTTP request and response. Now I am asked to extend the server to provide near real time data to clients using socket.io or some such thing.
I feel like the real time update requires a client and serve connection management and client state management on the server and that on its own is orthogonal to the RESTful aspects of my server. For a client, to get continuous data feed from a RESTful server, the client has to "poll" for it.
Is my statement correct? If not, is there a pattern for providing the two features?
Correct, RESTful services are contrary to the stateful client/server connection needed to give real time I/O. Without knowing how much data your talking about RESTful would be very expensive in I/O.
No, there's no contradiction. Each HTTP request takes a round-trip to set-up, and many more if you support SSL (which you should), or do most forms of authentication. Socket.io lets you minimize those setups, by leaving the connection open and authenticated, ready for the next request. You could do something fancy with the 100 Continue header, following section 8.2.3 of the spec: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec8.html
But, just doing normal RESTful https pull requests over socket.io should show a meaningful decrease in latency, by minimizing the need to re-establish connections. Of course, implementing full server push support will lower latency even more.
The tradeoff is increased complexity (though socket.io can be implemented in Express in a few lines), and increased memory consumption by leaving sockets open.
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.