hi! i actually use websockets (with node.js) and couchdb in a project of mine.
but i use websockets only to show the present state and communications between connected users, as well as notifications of new tickets and so on. i think this would be awkwardly to implement directly in couchdb (as oposed to node). for ordinary couchdb queries, i find the stateless rest approach easier to handle and scale. cheers, sifu On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Tobias Dühr <[email protected]>wrote: > Actually there's much of a difference between http/ajax/comet and > websocket. If you're interested here's a nice roundup: > > http://www.kaazing.org/confluence/display/KAAZING/WebSockets+versus+Comet+and+Ajax > > I was a bit unclear in the example, actually I dream of a js-object > "CouchDB" with methods like get,put,delete,etc... and also with full > websocket-functionality. > > I see couch often used in a js/ajax-context. But my point is that ajax > is a hack and websocket is (most probably) the future. > > I think it could be a big "selling-point" for couch if this new > technique is supported. > > But I agree with you, it's hard work because websockets work > differently from http. Nonetheless I think (actually I'm quite sure) > that there is no way around websockets in the future. > > > 2010/2/23 Andrew Melo <[email protected]>: > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Tobias Dühr <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Sorry for the confusion. I'll try to explain. > >> Here is a small js-snipped, mocking up the client part > >> > >> if ("WebSocket" in window) { > >> var ws = new WebSocket("ws://mycouchhost.com/"); > >> ws.onopen = function() { > >> ws.send("mydatabase/mydocument/"); // just a (dumb) example! One > >> would use wrapper functions or json > > > > Are you wanting to just GET the document? > > > >> }; > >> ws.onmessage = function (evt) { var received = evt.data; // reply is > >> a json-object }; > >> ws.onclose = function() { // websocket is closed. }; > >> } else { > >> // the browser doesn't support WebSocket. > >> } > >> > >> So actually I want all the functionality of couchdb, not just for > >> http, but also for websockets. > >> > >> WebSockets have much less overhead than http once the handshake has > >> been made and they provide server-push functionality. So I think it > >> could be nice to use them natively in couch. > > > > I don't use WebSockets, but it seems like a bunch of work for > > something that's pretty much already implemented...HTTP shouldn't have > > much overhead after handshake either, once the headers/responses are > > sent, it's just a content-length: numbytes and then a dump of the > > data. Can't get much lower than that. > > > >> > >> 2010/2/23 Jon Gretar Borgthorsson <[email protected]> > >>> > >>> I'm a bit confused. > >>> What would you like to have in the websocket interface? The _changes > feed? > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Jón Grétar Borgþórsson > >>> > >>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Tobias Dühr < > [email protected]>wrote: > >>> > >>> > Hi all, > >>> > > >>> > I've wondered if there are any plans to provide a websocket-server > within > >>> > couchdb in the future? One option to use this right now would be to > have an > >>> > ws-server (e.g.: node.js with websocket [ > >>> > > http://devthought.com/blog/2009/12/nodejs-and-the-websocket-protocol/] ) > >>> > to > >>> > translate ws to http and back. > >>> > It would be great if couch could handle ws all by itself. > >>> > > >>> > cheers, > >>> > tobi > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > Andrew Melo > > >
