couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Siegmund Führinger <s...@0xx0.net>
Subject Re: Websocket-Server?
Date Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:31:03 GMT
hi!

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Tobias Dühr <tobiasduehr@googlemail.com>wrote:

> Hi Siegmund,
> I understand you perfectly, that's just the way I would implement this
> right now. But think a year or two in the future - when all major
> browsers (excluding IE of course, but there are fallback-techniques)
> understand websockets.
> There will be many use-cases where websockets are superior to ajax and
> pushing the requests via js-ws to node (also js) to http/rest-couchdb
> and all the way back will be the way that feels awkward ;)
>

websockets and ordinary http requests serve two different purposes.
and websockets have the drawback, that you need to keep a connection open,
which just doesn't scale.



> But my question seems to be answered, there seem to be no plans to
> support ws in couch in the near future, right?
>

i'm not a couchdb contributor. so this is just my personal opinon. not that
of the couchdb project.

cheers,
sifu


> cheers,
> tobi
>
>
>
> 2010/2/23 Siegmund Führinger <sifu@0xx0.net>:
> > hi!
> >
> > i actually use websockets (with node.js) and couchdb in a project of
> mine.
> >
> > but i use websockets only to show the present state and communications
> > between connected users, as well as notifications of new tickets and so
> on.
> > i think this would be awkwardly to implement directly in couchdb (as
> oposed
> > to node).
> > for ordinary couchdb queries, i find the stateless rest approach easier
> to
> > handle and scale.
> >
> > cheers,
> > sifu
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Tobias Dühr <
> tobiasduehr@googlemail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Actually there's much of a difference between http/ajax/comet and
> >> websocket. If you're interested here's a nice roundup:
> >>
> >>
> http://www.kaazing.org/confluence/display/KAAZING/WebSockets+versus+Comet+and+Ajax
> >>
> >> I was a bit unclear in the example, actually I dream of a js-object
> >> "CouchDB" with methods like get,put,delete,etc... and also with full
> >> websocket-functionality.
> >>
> >> I see couch often used in a js/ajax-context. But my point is that ajax
> >> is a hack and websocket is (most probably) the future.
> >>
> >> I think it could be a big "selling-point" for couch if this new
> >> technique is supported.
> >>
> >> But I agree with you, it's hard work because websockets work
> >> differently from http. Nonetheless I think (actually I'm quite sure)
> >> that there is no way around websockets in the future.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2010/2/23 Andrew Melo <andrew.melo@gmail.com>:
> >> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Tobias Dühr <
> tobiasduehr@googlemail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> Sorry for the confusion. I'll try to explain.
> >> >> Here is a small js-snipped, mocking up the client part
> >> >>
> >> >> if ("WebSocket" in window) {
> >> >>  var ws = new WebSocket("ws://mycouchhost.com/");
> >> >>  ws.onopen = function() {
> >> >>    ws.send("mydatabase/mydocument/"); // just a (dumb) example! One
> >> >> would use wrapper functions or json
> >> >
> >> > Are you wanting to just GET the document?
> >> >
> >> >>  };
> >> >>  ws.onmessage = function (evt) { var received = evt.data; // reply
is
> >> >> a json-object };
> >> >>  ws.onclose = function() { // websocket is closed. };
> >> >> } else {
> >> >>  // the browser doesn't support WebSocket.
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> So actually I want all the functionality of couchdb, not just for
> >> >> http, but also for websockets.
> >> >>
> >> >> WebSockets have much less overhead than http once the handshake has
> >> >> been made and they provide server-push functionality. So I think it
> >> >> could be nice to use them natively in couch.
> >> >
> >> > I don't use WebSockets, but it seems like a bunch of work for
> >> > something that's pretty much already implemented...HTTP shouldn't have
> >> > much overhead after handshake either, once the headers/responses are
> >> > sent, it's just a content-length: numbytes and then a dump of the
> >> > data. Can't get much lower than that.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> 2010/2/23 Jon Gretar Borgthorsson <jon.borgthorsson@gmail.com>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'm a bit confused.
> >> >>> What would you like to have in the websocket interface? The _changes
> >> feed?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Jón Grétar Borgþórsson
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Tobias Dühr <
> >> tobiasduehr@googlemail.com>wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > Hi all,
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I've wondered if there are any plans to provide a websocket-server
> >> within
> >> >>> > couchdb in the future? One option to use this right now would
be
> to
> >> have an
> >> >>> > ws-server (e.g.: node.js with websocket [
> >> >>> >
> >> http://devthought.com/blog/2009/12/nodejs-and-the-websocket-protocol/]
> )
> >> >>> > to
> >> >>> > translate ws to http and back.
> >> >>> > It would be great if couch could handle ws all by itself.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > cheers,
> >> >>> > tobi
> >> >>> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > --
> >> > Andrew Melo
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message