Hi Henrik and Alex,

Henrik Sarvell <hsarv...@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi Alex, doesn't all that polling you're doing introduce a lot of
> unnecessary requests to the server.
> There can be up to 200 persons logged in at the same time at the site
> where I'm using websockets now, that would be 100 HTTP POSTS per
> second with full HTTP headers etc just to check for notifications that
> perhaps 1 or 2 of them would get per 10 seconds.

that is a good point.  However, is 100 requests per second really a
problem?  I am not familiar with your use-case, but if it is a chat
thing like the example from Alex, then the amount of work on the server
seems rather small and avoiding sending HTTP headers seems like
pointless micro-optimization.

> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Alexander Burger <a...@software-lab.de> 
> wrote:
>> To keep with the typical "realtime chat", a minimal setup could be:


>> Note that also text browsers like w3m can be used. Just the automatic
>> firing of the button won't happen without JavaScript, so the user must
>> press the "Chat" button whenever he wants an update. Also note that due
>> to the same-origin-policy of JavaScrpt (repeatedly discussed here) the
>> "Chat" buttun must be pressed in the beginning once, unless - as usually
>> recommended - 'httpGate' is running and the client connected directly to
>> "http://localhost";.

What about putting the log field into an iframe with automatic reload
instead of the +Auto button which needs javascript?  Would that not be
even better?


UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Reply via email to