Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

soketi.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 40 posts

Re: Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

#11

Post by mccorrinall »

jkarneges wrote: post #6

> Stop paying for €xpen$ive realtime First time I've seen what appears to be a purely free project going on the offense against SaaS providers, complete with a mock pricing table. I wonder what the motivation is. Bad experience with a SaaS? Brilliant website in any case. And I say this as someone who works on a realtime/push SaaS.

My guess: Their motivation is probably that they used a SaaS product, which was totally overpriced for what value it provided and they want to show that they can do it better for cheaper.

Anyway, what exactly is the use of this compared to just using uWS straight away? It’s build on uWS, so this is basically just a pusher implementation and some notification features with cool branding?

Re: Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

#12

Post by dmitriid »

jtokoph wrote: post #7

> Price: $5 (a DigitalOcean instance) > Connections: Unlimited > Messages: Unlimited Yeah...there is still a limit to what a $5 instance can handle.

That 5$ instance will cover 90% of the needs of 90% of the businesses out there.

You. Are. Not. Google/Facebook/Netflix/TikTok.

Re: Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

#13

Post by winrid »

jtokoph wrote: post #7

> Price: $5 (a DigitalOcean instance) > Connections: Unlimited > Messages: Unlimited Yeah...there is still a limit to what a $5 instance can handle.

The $5 instance can easily handle 50k connections, depending on what you're doing. I scaled to 40k clients and 50 megabytes a second sustained on a $10 Linode (but that was nchan, not this). That was after my first 50 paying customers...

Re: Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

#15

Post by haarts »

dmitriid wrote: post #12
jtokoph wrote: post #7

> Price: $5 (a DigitalOcean instance) > Connections: Unlimited > Messages: Unlimited Yeah...there is still a limit to what a $5 instance can handle.

That 5$ instance will cover 90% of the needs of 90% of the businesses out there. You. Are. Not. Google/Facebook/Netflix/TikTok.

> You. Are. Not. Google/Facebook/Netflix/TikTok.

That cannot be repeated enough. 90% of the tech flaunted here on HN is interesting only on a technical level, never in a business setting.

I suspect Google released Kubernetes to hamstring all competition. You do not need it. Unless you're Google.

Re: Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

#16

Post by rennokki »

jkarneges wrote: post #6

> Stop paying for €xpen$ive realtime First time I've seen what appears to be a purely free project going on the offense against SaaS providers, complete with a mock pricing table. I wonder what the motivation is. Bad experience with a SaaS? Brilliant website in any case. And I say this as someone who works on a realtime/push SaaS.

The creator of Soketi here. Even if I have 50-100 concurrent connections on most of the projects, I don't wanna be throttled by how many messages I can distribute to my end users - I might have < 100 users, but maybe I have to distribute fresh updates each 5 seconds, what do I do?

Re: Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

#17

Post by rennokki »

mccorrinall wrote: post #11
jkarneges wrote: post #6

> Stop paying for €xpen$ive realtime First time I've seen what appears to be a purely free project going on the offense against SaaS providers, complete with a mock pricing table. I wonder what the motivation is. Bad experience with a SaaS? Brilliant website in any case. And I say this as someone who works on a realtime/push SaaS.

My guess: Their motivation is probably that they used a SaaS product, which was totally overpriced for what value it provided and they want to show that they can do it better for cheaper. Anyway, what exactly is the use of this compared to just using uWS straight away? It’s build on uWS, so this is basically just a pusher implementation and some notification features with cool branding?

> My guess: Their motivation is probably that they used a SaaS product, which was totally overpriced for what value it provided and they want to show that they can do it better for cheaper.

Yes, and what I replied earlier in this thread: I'm not the only one having this issue with overpriced Pusher, I just dont want to be limited by Pusher on how many messages I wanna distribute to my end users.

> Anyway, what exactly is the use of this compared to just using uWS straight away? It’s build on uWS, so this is basically just a pusher implementation and some notification features with cool branding?

uWS is cool to be used in any WebSocket client. However, Pusher has a strict protocol, so I wanted a product that works with any Pusher SDK - so I won't have to rely on custom clients or something of that ilk.

Re: Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

#18

Post by rennokki »

dchuk wrote: post #4

I get their goal with the pricing comparison table, but it makes it initially appear like this has an actual cost (when in reality they're just saying all you need to do is put this on a cheap VPS).

It has - the server you're hosting Soketi on. That's it.

Re: Soketi: Simple, fast and resilient open-source WebSockets server

#19

Post by rennokki »

selcuka wrote: post #9
dchuk wrote: post #4

I get their goal with the pricing comparison table, but it makes it initially appear like this has an actual cost (when in reality they're just saying all you need to do is put this on a cheap VPS).

I guess they position themselves as a competitor to Pusher, which is a hosted service.

Not really - more as an open-source alternative that has many benefits for running it yourself instead of paying or being limited by existing, highly-reliable SaaS products.
Post reply on HN