Ok, that's what I thought about WebORB. We were using a custom polling mechanism before switching to sockets -- the delay was annoying, which is why we switched.
Are you saying that BlazeDS uses http persistent connections? You're right, that could get annoying. It doesn't make any sense to use persistent connections with apache or another large-scale HTTP server. My socket server bypasses apache and just uses TCP/IP and the Socket class to open as many persistent connections as I need. Since the communication is so lightweight (no files, or even real data passed), it shouldn't be a big deal to have hundreds or thousands of persistent connections at a time. Any time it needs to pass big data, it just stores it in the db, messages the recipients, who get it through a standard HTTP service. So far, our custom solution seems to be the best, since messages are sent fairly infrequently, but we want them to show up instantaneously. A 2 or 4 second poll per client, with each one accessing the database can get hairy pretty fast. Thanks ~sean On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 9:51 AM, valdhor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As far as I understand WebORB, it uses a pseudo push mechanism. The > client actively polls for any new data. (I could be wrong about this. > Please let me know if I am. I am basing my assumptions on forum posts > - eg. http://www.themidnightcoders.com/forum/default.aspx?g=posts&t=505). > > If you don't like active polling, look at BlazeDS. > > I use an active poll in my applications but I do it once every 30 > minutes (It's just to alert users of any news they need to know). > > I don't know if I like the non polling solution. It means that you > have to open a persistent connection to the server and sooner or later > you will run out of connections. > > > --- In [email protected] <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, "Sean > Clark Hess" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Does WebORB use sockets? I thought it was an http connection, but I > could > > be mistaken. If there's a better way, I'd be happy to switch, but I > couldn't > > find anything. The current system is VERY lightweight, and it's quite > > unlikely that WebORB is faster, but it might be a lot more stable -- I > > definitely want to look into it. > > > > Our needs are > > 1) Messaging between clients (Push to client) > > 2) Speed (for lightweight messages) > > > > Does WebORB do #1? > > > > I looked at the example you posted -- Yes, it is very easy to send > JSON to > > PHP and get a JSON response -- we are doing this elsewhere. But > HTTPService > > is, well, HTTP -- the server can't push data back to the client. > > > > Thanks! > > ~sean > > > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 7:42 AM, valdhor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I can't help you with your problem but do wonder why you felt > the need > > > to create your own socket system to implement JSON to PHP. > > > > > > AFAIK there are a number of solutions for this (eg. > > > > > > > > http://blog.paranoidferret.com/index.php/2007/08/24/flex-php-json-mysql-advanced-updating/ > > > ). > > > > > > Also, WebORB with AMF3 is a much simpler (And probably faster) > > > solution for getting data to and from Flex/PHP. > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com><flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com>, > "Sean > > > Clark Hess" <seanhess@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello coders! > > > > > > > > This is my first question to the list, so go easy on me, alright? :) > > > > > > > > I spent quite a while developing a good socket system that > > > communicated with > > > > PHP via JSON. It uses the Socket class (since that's the only way > > > you can > > > > do it, as far as I'm aware). It works perfectly now, with one small > > > > caveat. > > > > > > > > When testing it on machines with r45 of FP9 installed, it didn't > > > connect. > > > > I'm not sure which version started working, but I think it works on > > > r115 > > > > and r124. As far as I can tell, the connect event just never fires. > > > The > > > > policy file request goes through fine, but the socket server > never hears > > > > from the connection request. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > ~sean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
