I'm pretty sure this isn't possible with HTTP 1.1 or webservices, but just want to double check with you guys (and thus will probably be switching this application to WCF).
I want to send a message from the server an asp.net webservice is running on, to the client consuming it. Is this possible without polling (IE an interrupt based model)?
In WCF, you do have a thing called duplex bindings, which allows the server to call back into the client at a specific address.
See the MSDN documentation on duplex channels for a first impression of what those are.
I don't think you can do this with ASMX.
Marc
Related
For a while now I have been implementing a RESTful API in the design of my project because in my case it is very useful for others to be able to interact with the data in a consistent format (and I find REST to be a clean way of handling requests). I am now trying to not only have my current REST API for my resources, but the ability to expose some pieces of information via a bidirectional websocket connection.
Upon searching for a good .net library to use that implements the websocket protocol, I did find out about SignalR. There was a few problems I had with it (maybe specific to my project?)
I want to be able to initialize a web socket connection through my
existing REST API. (I don't know the proper practice to do this, but
I figured a custom header would work fine) I would like them (the
client) to be able to close the connection and get a http response
back (101?) to signify its completion.
The problem I had with SignalR was:
that there was no clean way outside of a hub instance to get a user's connection id and map it to a external controller where the rest call made affects what piece of data gets broadcasted to the specific client (I don't want to use external memory)
the huge reliance on client side code. I really want to make this process as simple to the client and handle the majority of the work on the server side (which I had hoped modifying my current rest api would accomplish). The only responsibility I see of a client is to disconnect peacefully.
So now the question..
Is there a good server side websocket library for .net that implements the latest web socket protocol? The client can use any client library that adheres to the protocol. What is the best practice to incorporate both web socket connections and a restful api?
ASP.NET supports WebSockets itself if you have IIS8 (only Windows 8/2012 and further). SignalR is just a polyfill,
If you do not have IIS8, you can use external WebSocket frameworks like mine: http://vtortola.github.io/WebSocketListener/
Cheers.
I'm trying to implement a custom live chat program on the web, but I'm not sure how to handle the real-time (or near real-time) updates for users. Would it make more sense to send Ajax requests from the client side every second or so, polling the database for new comments?
Is there a way to somehow broadcast from the database each time a comment is added? If this is possible how would that work? I'm using Sql Server 2008 with Asp.net (c#).
Thanks!
Use long polling/server side push/comet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_(programming))
Also see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_technology
I think when you use long polling you'll also want your web server to provide some support in the form of non-blocking io for requests, so that you aren't holding a thread per connection.
You could have each client poll the server, and at the server side keep the connection open without responding.
As soon there is a message detected at server side, this data is returned through the already open connection. On receipt, your client immediately issues a new request.
There's some complexity as you need to keep track server side which connections is associated with which session, and which should be responded upon to prevent timeouts.
I never actually did this but this should be the most resource efficient way.
Nope. use queuing systems like RabiitMq or ActiveMQ. Check mongoDB too.
A queuing system will give u a publish - subscribe facilities.
I was watching many presentations about Html 5 WebSockets , where server can initialize connection with client and push the data without the request from the client.
We don't need Polling etc.
And , I am curious , why Http was designed as a "pull" and not full duplex protocol in the first place ? What where the reasons behind that kind of decision ?
Because when http was first designed it was meant to be used to retrieve documents from a server. And the easiest way to do is when the client asks the server for a document and gets it delivered as response (or an error in case it does not exist). When you have push protocol that means the server would need to keep client connections around for potentially a long time creating more resource management problems - remember we are talking about early 1990s here.
Http was designed for simply retrieving hypertext documents from a server. There were no reasons to push anything to the client when the pages were just pure, static html without scripting capabilities.
Since there was no need at the time for pushing things back to the client, the protocol was kept simple.
HTTP is mainly a pull protocol—someone loads information on a Web server and
users use HTTP to pull the information from the server at their convenience. In particular,
the TCP connection is initiated by the machine that wants to receive the file.
I have created a simple chat server that is driven by client polling. Clients send requests for data every few seconds, and get handed any new messages as well as information about whether their peer is still connected.
Since the client is running on a mobile platform (iPhone), I've been looking for ways of getting rid of the polling, which quickly drains the battery. I've read that it's possible to keep an http connection open indefinitely, but haven't understood how to utilize this technique in practice. I'm also wondering whether such connections are stable enough to use in a mobile setting.
The ideal scenario would be that the server only sends data to clients when an event that affects them has occurred (such as a peer posting a message or going off line).
Is it advisable to try to accomplish this over http, or would I have to write my own protocol over tcp? How hard would it be to customize xmpp to my need (my chat server has some specialized features that I would have to easily implement).
How about push technology? see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_(programming)
I think you're describing XMPP over BOSH.
http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0206.html
I've used this http-binding method between a chat server and javascript client on non-mobile devices. It worked well for me.
You might like to check out this project which uses a variety of techniques including Comet. Release details are here, here's a snippet from that page
It’s my distinct pleasure to be able
to announce the first public showing
of a project that I’ve been working on
in my spare time in the last month or
two, a new Web Based IRC chat
application.
This project brings together a lot of
new technologies which had to be
developed to make this a feasible,
scalable and efficient.
Some of the underlying tools build to
make this posible that i consider
’stable enough’ are already released,
such as the php Socket Daemon library
i wrote to be able to deal with
hundreds up to many thousands of
“Comet” http connections, and an equal
amount of IRC client connections.
I just found this article myself, which describes the following technique (which I referred to in the question):
... have the client make an HTTP request
and have the server hold the request
on the queue until there is a message
to push. if the TCP/IP connection is
lost or times-out, the client will
make a new HTTP request, and the delay
will only be the round trip time for a
request/response pair . . . this model
effectively requires two TCP/IP
connections for HTTP, client to
server, though none permanent and
hence mobile friendly
I think this is nearly impossible and dangerous. The internet works stateless and connectionless meaning that the connection between client and server is always handled as unreliable. And this is not for fun.
By trying to get a stateful connection you are introducing new issues. Especially from a 3g application. What if the connection breaks? You have no control over the server and cannot push.
I think it would even be easier to send sms/text messages and have an application that handles that.
Links to articles would also be appreciated--I don't know the terminology to search for.
I'm looking to learn how a web application can allow for server-to-client communications. I know the web was not designed for this and that it has been something of a hurdle, and am just wondering what the state of this is, and what the best practices are.
An alternative is constant or occasional polling via ajax, but is it possible for web servers to maintain stateful connections to a web client?
Edit: Another way to ask this question is how does StackOverflow tell a page that new posts are available for it to display that little bar at the top?
StackOverflow polls the server to check if there is more data.
What you're looking for is Comet.
To get true two way communications from a browser you need to use a plugin technology like Silverlight, Flash, et al. Those plugins can create TCP connections that can establish a two way persistent connection with a server socket. Note that you can't really establish the TCP connection with the HTTP server so you'd have to create an additional server agent to do the communicating back to the browser.
Basically it's a completely differnet deployment model to what AJAX sites like Stackoverflow, Gmail etc. use. They all rely on the browser polling the server at set intervals.
Web browsers really aren't set up to handle this sort of communication. The communication is a one way street where the web server is listening on a port (typically 80 or 443) for for information to be sent to it.
I just read the link on comet, and it's interesting approach, but what has to be remembered is that it is still technically being opened by the client. The server is sending code for it to execute, but the browser is ultimately in control and determines when the server communicates with it.
With today's web browsers the server can never technically execute a message being sent to it without the help of the browser. Technically you might be able to get around that by executing some Active X control on the client machine...but I haven't tried it.
You can't, HTTP is stateless. A long time ago Netscape implemented HTTP Push but it wasn't a sucess.
I'd use polling with a web service or similar; no plugin (that is Flash, Java,Silverlight) will have rights in its sandbox to use raw sockets so it'll be a waste of time trying to implement it that way.