You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@couchdb.apache.org by Tobias Dühr <to...@googlemail.com> on 2010/02/23 09:46:33 UTC
Websocket-Server?
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
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Jon Gretar Borgthorsson <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Tobias Dühr <to...@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 are in many ways better than the things like long polling or
comet. AJAX however is NOT a hack in any way and WebSocket is not meant to
replace HTTP nor AJAX and neither can it ever do that. Taking normal
request-response communication like a DB query, that your webapp relies on,
and putting over WebSocket just seems like a bad idea. Not to mention that
you exclude 90% of corporate users with firewall settings.
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Tobias Duehr <to...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
maybe I was settling on the wrong horse with couch+websockets. For
anyone interested, here's a ws library for node.js that has redis-db
(not as nice as couch, but still) support.
http://github.com/guille/node.websocket.js/
Thank you all for the replies! The whole concept of couch still
appeals to me and I'll keep an eye on the project.
One last thing: WebSockets are not affected by any firewalls.
http://www.websockets.org/about.html
2010/2/23 Siegmund Führinger <si...@0xx0.net>:
> hi!
>
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Tobias Dühr <to...@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 <si...@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 <an...@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 <jo...@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
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Siegmund Führinger <si...@0xx0.net>.
hi!
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Tobias Dühr <to...@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 <si...@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 <an...@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 <jo...@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
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Tobias Dühr <to...@googlemail.com>.
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 ;)
But my question seems to be answered, there seem to be no plans to
support ws in couch in the near future, right?
cheers,
tobi
2010/2/23 Siegmund Führinger <si...@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 <to...@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 <an...@gmail.com>:
>> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Tobias Dühr <to...@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 <jo...@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
>> >
>>
>
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Siegmund Führinger <si...@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 <to...@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 <an...@gmail.com>:
> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Tobias Dühr <to...@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 <jo...@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
> >
>
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Tobias Dühr <to...@googlemail.com>.
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 <an...@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Tobias Dühr <to...@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 <jo...@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 <to...@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
>
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Andrew Melo <an...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Tobias Dühr <to...@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 <jo...@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 <to...@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
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Tobias Dühr <to...@googlemail.com>.
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
};
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.
2010/2/23 Jon Gretar Borgthorsson <jo...@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 <to...@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
> >
Re: Websocket-Server?
Posted by Jon Gretar Borgthorsson <jo...@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 <to...@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
>