I have been programming in nodejs have looked at how to use both socket.io and ajax calls to the node server. Is socket.io designed to replace ajax? I am curious to know in which cases it is good to use socket.io and which ones ajax is nicer. Thanks for the input.
Well, one of the main thing web sockets (via socket.io) provides that ajax lacks is server push. So with ajax if you want to find out about new events on the server (a different user sent you a message, for example), you need to do server polling, meaning you send ajax requests in a relatively frequent periodic loop. Most of the time the server responds that there's nothing new, but occasionally when there is something new, the client can learn about it.
Web sockets allow the server to actively push notices to the client without polling. So if your application has any kind of information that needs to start on the server and just show up in the browser, web sockets are a better solution there.
Submitting data to the server in request/response model
ajax or web sockets essentially equivalent, traditional form POSTS also OK
Submitting events to the server in an event stream model
web sockets are best, can be emulated via ajax somewhat
Pushing events from server to browser
web sockets are best, can be emulated via ajax long polling, flash, etc (socket.io has several fallbacks it can try to use if real web sockets are not available).
older browsers, some mobile platforms
web socket support is not there, so ajax is your fallback
Related
I am working on a project which is basically a Customer Feedback Analysis Dashboard. There are few graphs on the dashboard and data for each graph is fetched from the server through API requests.
Right now the dashboard is updated every time the page is refreshed. I want it to be updated immediately when there is a new feedback in the system. I am confused, whether I use websockets to send data for each graph or just a flag and use that flag to fetch data through API requests.
Like, facebook/twitter does. They tell you about new posts/tweets and when you click that button your feed/wall gets updated.
If you want to "push" data from server to client and you want that data to show up in a timely fashion (e.g. within 10-20 seconds of when it was available on the server), then you will want to implement some sort of "push" solution where the server can efficiently push data to the client whenever there is new data to send.
There are several possible approaches:
webSockets
socket.io
Server-sent events
Mobile platform-specific push (Android and iOS)
For a general purpose solution that works within a browser, you will want to use one of the first three. socket.io is built on top of webSockets (it just adds more features) so architecturally, they are similar.
Server-sent events are fairly new (modern browsers only) and are only for one way communication (from server to client). webSockets can be used for communication either way.
I'd personally recommend socket.io because of the features it offers (such as automatic client reconnection) and a simplified messaging layer. You can see the feature difference between socket.io and webSockets here. With socket.io, the client makes a connection to the server when the web page is loaded and that connection is persistent. After the connection is established, then either client or server can send messages to the other at any time in a very efficient manner.
Other useful references:
Push notification | is websocket mandatory?
websocket vs rest API for real time data?
Why to use websocket and what is the advantage of using it?
What are the pitfalls of using Websockets in place of RESTful HTTP?
Ajax vs Socket.io
I am a bit confused about how one uses websockets. I have already set up a websocket server and are able to receive from server and send to server.
My question is. When using websockets, are you supposed to drop the ajax part completely? Or are you supposed to use websockets alongside ajax?
Example:
I want to use websockets on a chat service on a website where users can log in. When logging in, I use ajax. When on the message page I use websockets to receive future messages, and send future messages. But when navigating to the messages page, I use ajax to get the messages from database.
Is this the correct way of using websockets? Or should I do everything in websockets since 1 user 1 active connection is more efficient? Or should 1 user have 1 websocket connection, but still keep sending ajax requests to the server when navigating to some pages without reloading the site, using ajax?
What is the best practice when creating a large application where users can log in, navigate to pages to load stuff async, but still wanting that bidirectional real time benefits of websockets on stuff like messaging services and notification services on that same website?
There is no reason you cannot use both. I think the solution depends on what server side resources you are using. I may need access to a server through websockets to get updates to a chat dialogue. I may use a completely different system to get user statistics or provide authentication.
I don't think there is a specific answer to your question as it varies depending on the application in question.
First of, I read the information here http://signalr.net/
You may have heard of WebSockets, a new HTML5 API that enables bi-directional communication between the browser and server. SignalR will use WebSockets under the covers when it's available, and gracefully fallback to other techniques and technologies when it isn't, while your application code stays the same.
SignalR also provides a very simple, high-level API for doing server to client RPC (call JavaScript functions in your clients' browsers from server-side .NET code) in your ASP.NET application, as well as adding useful hooks for connection management, e.g. connect/disconnect events, grouping connections, authorization.
And from answer here: How SignalR works internally?
SignalR has a few built in transports:
WebSockets
Server Sent Events
Forever Frame
Long polling
I have a little problem with understanding the article (theoretically).
So how does SignalR work briefly for each build in transports? (easy English may help, since I'm complete new to SignalR and web socket)
WebSockets
Server Sent Events
Forever Frame
Long polling
I'm giving socket.io a whirl and I'm curious as to what I should and shouldn't be doing with websockets.
For example is there a way to authenticate a websocket (include id in every message perhaps?)? Let's say I'm creating a 'google docs' like app in which people can create new documents. Should I be using AJAX to create new documents instead of websockets? That way I can use the standard HTTP transport layer to do all of the user authorization (checking session, etc) and then simply ping back the page with a websocket event. Curious as to how people handle situations like this.
I would recommend using AJAX wherever you do not absolutely need web sockets. Web sockets end up creating more load on the server side (socket.io will take care of fallbacks in case web sockets & flash sockets are not available). In short, use web sockets where you need to maintain that state/connection to the client.
If you wish to use web sockets, using cookies with socket.io would be one approach that would allow you to keep track of your sessions. If not using socket.io right away, you can send req.sessionID (key) to the client, store the session information in Redis/Mongo etc. When the socket.io connection is attempted, read the cookie value & send it to the server - where you can get the session store information. There may be issues if you use flash sockets as one of the fallbacks.
Hope this helps.
I'm currently building a realtime application using Node. I'm using socket.io to power my real-time interactions, but have jQuery loaded, so I have AJAX available to me. I initially used socket.io for all my communication between the server and client.
I'm starting to think that AJAX might be better suited for certain cases like doing RESTful transactions asynchronously, because I don't have to write a separate message case in my socket to handle each new transaction as well as write the RESTful routing.
I'm wondering if I am on to something or if its best to use sockets for performance or something else I'm not thinking about.
Thanks!
Matt Mueller
Yes, WebSockets (RFC 6455) and Ajax are quite different and serve different purposes.
As you say, with Ajax you can do RESTful requests. This means that you can take advantage of existing HTTP-infrastructure like e.g. proxies to cache requests and use conditional get requests. Ajax request may be quite heavy-weight since every Ajax request contains HTTP headers and include cookies.
WebSockets is designed for low latency bi-directional communication. By design, WebSockets has very little overhead in each message. E.g. WebSockets messages doesn't have to include any HTTP Headers, and may in future be used for VoIP and streaming in both directions.
Another difference is that Ajax can be used with stateless servers. E.g. if you have your web load balanced with multiple servers, any server can handle an Ajax request, even after reboot (or upgrade). Websocket's are "connected" and use a stateful server, so it may be harder to use multiple servers with it.
There is also Server Sent Events, that are similar to WebSockets, in that the server can push data to the client (which can't be done with Ajax without hacks (e.g. comet)), and it can also handle automatic reconnections. But it's only for messages in one direction (server to client). See HTML5 Server-Side Event: EventSource vs. wrapped WebSocket.
Those are two completely different technologies and could be used together: with AJAX the request is initiated by the client, while with WebSockets the request is initiated by the server in order to push some data to the client.