In my pc if I open different tabs in IE or Chrome, different processes will be created, so each process can be listening through separate TCP port. So they manage session successfully.
But in case of Mozilla, single process will be created in Operating System, even many tabs are opened! As Mozilla creates multiple threads for multiple tabs, it has only single process id.
If a packet arrives from a web server, My OS will handover it to a particular process, using TCP Destination port number!!!
In case of IE, Chrome there is no issue, as they have different processes for each tab…!
But how Mozilla able to manage different sessions with single process…?
In fact its much simpler when you use threads, tabs are not standalone entries, each page is rendered in firefox core and what you see in the tabs are only representation of data, the view :)
It's possible to listen for response on severel connection within one process.
Handling multible tabs with one or severel processes is a design choise with pros an cons.
Related
I am accessing my PHP/Apache website from Chrome. And Chrome refuses to load the page, saying "Waiting for available socket".
Other pages on this same virtual host also have the problem.
Other virtual hosts on the same server load perfectly fine.
Please advise how I can fix this.
According to various sources, Chrome opens a maximum of 6 simultaneous connections to the same server. Possible solutions include
Host data on different virtual hosts on the same machine.
Consolidate content to be loaded to require fewer connections (for example, put everything in a single .data file for Emscripten)
Make sure you don't have too many <video> or <audio> tags marked with the attribute preload="auto".
Adjust Chrome to permit up to 32 connections. Policy List
Related question:
Chrome hangs after certain amount of data transfered - waiting for available socket
Sorry if this is a dumb question that's already been asked, but I don't even know what terms to best search for.
I have a situation where a cloud app would deliver a SPA (single page app) to a client web browser. Multiple clients would connect at once and would all work within the same network. An example would be an app a business uses to work together - all within the same physical space (all on the same network).
A concern is that the internet connection could be spotty. I know I can store the client changes locally and then push them all to the server once the connection is restored. The problem, however, is that some of the clients (display systems) will need to show up-to-date data from other clients (mobile input systems). If the internet goes down for a minute or two it would be unacceptable.
My current line of thinking is that the local network would need some kind of "ThinServer" that all the clients would connect to. This ThinServer would then work as a proxy for the main cloud server. If the internet breaks then the ThinServer would take over the job of syncing data. Since all the clients would be full SPAs the only thing moving around would be the data - so the ThinServer would really just need to sync DB info (it probably wouldn't need to host the full SPA - though, that wouldn't be a bad thing).
However, a full dedicated server is obviously a big hurdle for most companies to setup.
So the question is, is there any kind of tech that would allow a web page to act as a web server? Could a business be instructed to go to thinserver.coolapp.com in a browser on any one of their machines? This "webpage" would then say, "All clients in this network should connect to 192.168.1.74:2000" (which would be the IP:port of the machine running this page). All the clients would then connect to this new "server" and that server would act as a data coordinator if the internet ever went down.
In other words, I really don't like the idea of a complicated server setup. A simple URL to start the service would be all that is needed.
I suppose the only option might have to be a binary program that would need to be installed? It's not an ideal solution - but perhaps the only one? If so, are their any programs out there that are single click web servers? I've tried MAMP, LAMP, etc, but all of them are designed for the developer. Any others that are more streamlined?
Thanks for any ideas!
There are a couple of fundamental ways you can approach this. The first is to host a server in a browser as you suggest. Some example projects:
http://www.peer-server.com
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/browser-server/
Another is to use WebRTC peer to peer communication to allow the browsers share information between each other (you could have them all share date or have one act as a 'master' etc deepening not he architecture you wanted). Its likely not going to be that different under the skin, but your application design may be better suited to a more 'peer to peer' model or a more 'client server' one depending on what you need. An example 'peer to peer' project:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/API/WebRTC/Peer-to-peer_communications_with_WebRTC
I have not used any of the above personally but I would say, from using similar browser extension mechanisms in the past, that you need to check the browser requirements before you decide if they can do what you want. The top one above is Chrome based (I believe) and the second one is Firefox. The peer to peer one contains a list of compatible browser functions, but is effectively Firefox and Chrome based also (see the table in the link). If you are in an environment where you can dictate the browser type and plugins etc then this may be ok for you.
The concept is definitely very interesting (peer to peer web servers) and it is great if you have the time to explore it. However, if you have an immediate business requirement, it might be that a simple on site server based approach may actually be more reliable, support a wider variety of browser and actually be easier to maintain (as the skills required are quite commonly available).
BTW, I should have said - 'WebRTC' is probably a good search term for you, in answer to the first line of your question.
httprelay.io v.s. WebRTC
Pros:
Simple to use
Fast
Supported by all browsers and HTTP clients
Can be used with the not stable network
Opensource and cross-platform
Cons:
Need to run a server instance
No data streaming is supported (yet)
We are trying to optimize our ASP.NET MVC app and get a big time difference between our server side logs and client side delay.
When refresh the page in Chrome in Timeline it shows 4.47s:
As I understand from the picture, the time for server side code execution should be 3.34s, but in our server logs we have the following:
Begin Request 15:41:52.421
End Request 15:41:53.218
Pre Send Request Headers 15:41:53.218
Pre Send Request Content 15:41:53.218
So, according to server side logs code execution took only 797ms in total.
It does not happen all the time and very often the Chrome timeline shows times very close to server logs. But sometimes we have this couple of seconds delay.
Where could this delay come from?
There is lot of stuff that can affect the time sporadically to such an extent, even though addition of almost three seconds is sort of excessive for this scenario. Since you don't mention much about how is your network set up, what operating system u use etc,
I'll try to sum up a list of what comes to my mind when dealing with this sort of a delay, sorted by probability.
The main problem here is the Waiting part of the total time there you should concentrate your detective talent.
Please note that the answer is very general since the question says virtually nothing about configuration of the server, client computer or the network (if any) between them. Since you say the delay is not present all the time, there are one or more moving targets you need to aim at.
Antivirus
If you have an internet shield or similarly named component, it is not uncommon that the antivirus can seemingly randomly delay some connections while leaving other virtually untouched. For the browser this is transparent (it's just a delay, whatever may have caused it), hence the Waiting.
Network issue
Especially if you are connected through a wireless network or poorly configured wired network, a few seconds delay may occur even though the label on the network device says TurboSpeedTM.
Server side issue
Server may be overloaded with previous requests in a manner not covered by your in-application timer, since there are many steps the server performs before and after your script is executed.
Client OS issue
Just like the antivirus, the OS can delay your packets virtually randomly for various reasons.
When hunting down such issue, I would recommend trying to perform the query on the server itself and compare resulting times, try as may combinations of network setup and operation systems as possible, prefer well planned network environments to those with many unknown or external factors (read wireless) and make use of some packet sniffing software (like wireshark) to check whether the browser doesn't lie. And that would be just the start of it :)
I'm coding an extension for a customer, one of the requirements is that the extension also works offline because internet services are not that reliable, my customer's business can't stop but can deal with "stale" data, thats a nice tradeoff I guess.
Therefore, I want to code some kind of distributed cache as an extension to synchronize local data among the N nodes that will be connected running the same application and thus synchronize with the real database, hosted on the internet.
In order to achieve that I imagined that I would need to make a network broadcast and listen to incoming broadcasts, then every node that starts to run my application will broadcast it's IP address and become available as a new node for the distributed cache, failover is very important here.
I googled some possibilities I initially thought but none of them will work, I guess. The first was to do it just with HTTP, the second was to use Google Native Client to write C++ code that could run network code and thus do the broadcast, but it has limitations. Right now I'm thinking to use Java Applets but I don't really know if they have some limitations related to networking or if Chrome Extensions has any limitation with Java Applets.
Any ideas on how to do it? Using some of the stuff I suggested or another approach?
You could create an NPAPI extension, which would not be restricted by Chrome at all.
Say a website on my localhost takes about 3 seconds to do each request. This is fine, and as expected (as it is doing some fancy networking behind the scenes).
However, if i open the same url in tabs (in firefox), then reload them all at the same time, it appears to load each page sequentially rather than all at the same time. What is this all about?
Have tried it on windows server 2008 iis and windows 7 iis
It really depends on the web browser you are using and how tab support in it has been programmed.
It is probably using a single thread to load each tab in turn, which would explain your observation.
Edit:
As others have mentioned, it is also a very real possibility the the webserver running on your localhost is single threaded.
If I remember correctly HTTP standard limits the number of concurrent conections to the same host to 2. This is the reason highload websites use CDNs (content delivery networks).
network.http.max-connections 60
network.http.max-connections-per-server 30
The above two values determine how many connections Firefox makes to a server. If threshold is breached, it will pipeline the requests.
Each browser implements it in its own way. The requests are made in such a way to maximize the performance. Moreover, it also depends on the server (localhost which is slower).
Your local web server configuration might have only one thread, so every next request will wait for the previous to finish