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

21–30 of 40 posts

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

#21

Post by dmitriid »

haarts wrote: post #15
dmitriid wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Funnily enough most of those pods and serverless functions etc. will likely have magnitudes less available resources than a 5$ instance on Digital Ocean.

But... but... Google are doing it!

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

#22

Post by themoonisachees »

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).

They're positioning themselves as a competition to saas, which has a cost. Saying "it is free" is not exactly true either because costumers that are using SaaS typically have weak infrastructure, which means that one way or another they're going to have to spend money to use this.

I love FOSS, but the fact of the matter is that companies don't really care about FOSS. They care that the software they're using is working when they need it, and ultimately paying $49 a month is cheaper than owning or renting infrastructure AND paying someone to administer it in a way that works consistently, when they need it.

Saying "it is free" is true, but the man-hours you're now dedicating to hosting it, monitoring it, the network admin required, the time spent when it's not working, the single point of failure being moved from a datacenter to possibly an office building, the backup process, infratructure and administration, all of that costs money, and you get it all accounted for (and economies of scale cheaper) with SaaS. That is the single biggest reason SaaS is so popular with companies, with enough SaaS you can just rent an office and buy laptops, and only hire devs.

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

#23

Post by anonymous344 »

I'm a php & mysql -dev and still can't understand these websockets. What if I have a cron job that sends messages to this websocket server and it pushes them to web-app (vue front, added to home screen on mobile phone, not an installed app) push notification. How this can be done ? and how can the server even keep up with the websocket connections to thousands of clients ? does the websocket re-open if user restarts their phone?

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

#26

Post by nesarkvechnep »

rennokki wrote: post #16
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?

You use a stack which supports it. Elixir and Erlang support millions of concurrent websocket connections on a single, albeit beefy, server.

https://phoenixframework.org/blog/the-road-to-2-million-webs...

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

#27

Post by jamil7 »

nesarkvechnep wrote: post #26
rennokki wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You use a stack which supports it. Elixir and Erlang support millions of concurrent websocket connections on a single, albeit beefy, server. https://phoenixframework.org/blog/the-road-to-2-million-webs...

The library is built on top of uWebsockets which is fairly well-known as being highly optimised and performant, especially if you skip the Node.js wrapper and use the underlying C/C++ lib directly. Does anyone know what tradeoffs or different performance characteristics one would expect to see from e.g. Elixir/Erlang vs uWebsockets?

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

#28

Post by nesarkvechnep »

jamil7 wrote: post #27
nesarkvechnep wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You use a stack which supports it. Elixir and Erlang support millions of concurrent websocket connections on a single, albeit beefy, server. https://phoenixframework.org/blog/the-road-to-2-million-webs...

The library is built on top of uWebsockets which is fairly well-known as being highly optimised and performant, especially if you skip the Node.js wrapper and use the underlying C/C++ lib directly. Does anyone know what tradeoffs or different performance characteristics one would expect to see from e.g. Elixir/Erlang vs uWebsockets?

Elixir/Erlang are surely slower but the BEAM is a fantastic runtime and compensates with fault-tolerance and predictable performance. I know I prefer my server to be as responsive at 1 million connections as at 1 hundred.
Post reply on HN