Thanks @Leif, @Kit and @Dave.
The Comment regarding more IPs is valid, but we try to set up VPSs on demand.
So running more VPSs still is easier (and costs about the same) than adding IPs.
For some reason we have 3 ports per open websocket connection:
- 1 from user to ATS (that's obvious)
- 1 from ATS to local node process (also obvious)
- 1 somehow back to ATS another socket gets used (this is just our
interpretation, no idea where this 3rd port comes from)
This way we hit the max ports way earlier than using up our RAM, which sets a
safe limit of around 7k users per ATS.
Using nginx with a unix socket to the node process gives for around 45k users.
Is there any option we could try to at least get the number of blocked ports
down to 2 per user?
And since I didn't find information regarding rules for this mailing list, how
about
- top posting?
- asking for payed help?
- asking about giving bounties for such a feature request?
Thank you all, also for ATS in general, I really love its capabilities (though
just scratching the surface).
Am 24.10.23 um 16:20 schrieb Leif Hedstrom:
Yeh this is not possible at this time. It’s a feature we have been looking to
add for quite a while, just hasn’t been a priority for anyone.
— Leif
On Oct 24, 2023, at 03:50, Philipp <technik@vistream.online> wrote:
Hi,
I am using ATS (successfully) to forward incoming websocket connections to a
local receiver listening on 8080/tcp (node process).
But since this means multiple local ports being used for effectively a single
users websocket connection, I would like to forward those incoming connection
to a unix socket instead of a tcp port.
The main problem is, that using tcp ports runs quickly into the limit of max
open ports (even after tweaking sysctl values).
I was looking into documentation and Github issues, searched the web, but only
found a reference, that it should be possible.
I use a maping rule right now:
remap.config:
```
regex_map wss://(.*).example.com/sockets ws://127.0.0.1:8080/sockets
```
When changing the receiving part to "unix:///some/path" ATS complains about
mixing protocols (ws vs unix).
Is this just wrongly written, or not even possible?
Thanks for any insights.
Philipp
