Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple APILearn More
asgs902433dIf you don't plan on storing the messages in a datastore, each client (the user) should be connected via WS. This then means that users who are offline can't see the messages that were sent during that time. Same goes with redis pub-sub. Only the curently active subscribers get the messages
Regarding the number of connections a server can support, it is really a matter of performance/benchmark testing simulating the expected max concurrent connections
Also, have you considered XMPP and the like?
dUcKtYpEd370433d@asgs luckily this idea im playing with is based on clients speaking to each other only when online within close proximity and messages wont be persistant. My understanding of websockets has been that they demand a port for each socket and thats where i get confused as there are only so many available ports to consume. I have looked into that standard and a few others though. Even though i have a good chunk of the POC built out other then the messaging portion, Im still toying around with how capable it is.
asgs902433d@dUcKtYpEd WS is nothing different from other communication protocols. Every incoming connection needs a local port on the server sending them the messages
If resource limits are the problem (and they will be), have a load balancer and an auto scaling policy based on the right system metrics