5 ms·

uWebSockets 0.10.0

123 points by alexhultman 10y ago

k__ 10y ago
I like it. All the nice optimizations that you only can do if you know what's happening in the background. I read post about how Bluebird Promise implementation is more efficient than others and it was basically stuff like storing state as binary flags instead of boolean vars etc. pp.
wolframhempel 10y ago
congratulations, amazing release. Very much looking forward to working together on https://deepstream.io/ https://deepstream.io/
- cheez 10y ago
  Can I ask: how do you guys fund stuff like deepstream.io? Do you develop it for specific projects?
  - wolframhempel 10y ago
    we're working on building a new kind of realtime data platform. The aim was to base it on a powerful open source core and release that first to alleviate concerns around vendor lock-in and third-party risk when using a PaaS offering.
    - seeekr 10y ago
      I think the GP wanted to know: How do you finance development like this? As in, it seems like a lot of work, how do you sustain yourselves financially while noone is (yet) paying for using the fruit of the work?
      - wolframhempel 10y ago
        It's a good question. Going down that route takes a significant amount of time before one can expect the first paying user. We've originally funded it out of our own pocket and later raised VC funding for the project as well http://venturebeat.com/2016/04/07/deepstreamhub-raises-1-million-for-real-time-app-development-platform/ http://venturebeat.com/2016/04/07/deepstreamhub-raises-1-mil...
lpinca 10y ago
Congrats for this achievement. For anyone using this in Node.js I strongly suggest to run your own benchmarks as uws is no way 47x 18x 33x and 2x times faster/more lightweight than ws. Also check how the improvements are obtained.
- yasserf 10y ago
  We moved to using uWS for deepstream.io 1.0 release and had great feedback from the community. To literally quote a user in production: 'After we upgraded to deepstream 1.0 we are seeing that the resource consumption is about 50% of what is was before so we still have growing space on our servers'. This was for the 0.7 release so I'm excited to see if 0.10 reduces this even further.
  - lpinca 10y ago
    Yes, for 100k connection, using Alex's own benchmarks I saw that uws is up to 2x faster/more lightweight than ws except for the short message throughput where uws really shines and is up to 10x faster. It is a lot, don't get me wrong but the numbers on the README are obtained comparing the C++ server with ws which is totally wrong imho.
- Kiro 10y ago
  What do you mean when you say ws? Isn't uws just a library for ws?
  - lpinca 10y ago
    `ws` is another popular WebSocket implementation for Node.js
  - k__ 10y ago
    WebSockets is the protocol, ws is a lib implementing it.
  - alexhultman 10y ago
    uws is a reimplementation of the ws interface, using fewer resources and providing better throughput.
socmag 10y ago
We are using uWS for our platform which is completely written in native C++. I haven't tested the scalability to a million clients, but I have no reason to doubt it could handle it. On the other hand, I have tested with 20k clients each sending 100 x 128 byte messages a second. So I've tried pumping 2 million messages a second through our platform (which is at the envelope of my expected load), and the server just sits there and takes it. At these levels saturating the network interface is the main issue. I've also tried it in single core, 4 core, 8 core and 20 core threaded configurations. Everything works as it should and contention is quite minimal. The ability to achieve that over WebSockets is largely due to the work Alex has done (and continues to do) to squeeze every last ounce out of the stack. As far as I'm concerned uWebSockets 0.10.0 is rock solid and at the point where using it in production is totally fine. I can totally recommend it. Congrats on the release Alex and thanks for the lib!
- Matthias247 10y ago
  Did you also perform some tests with slow clients (or ones that do not receive data at all)? These are the situations where it usually gets a lot more interesting. E.g. if the library just buffers messages all the way until they can be sent you might get out of memory sooner or later.
  - socmag 10y ago
    Ah well we have high level policy to deal with obnoxious clients. We will forcibly boot a client if it exceeds certain limits. This is imposed at the application layer. But no I haven't explicitly tested with thousands of leaky clients.
  - alexhultman 10y ago
    You can register callbacks to the send calls so that you can keep track of the built up "to be sent" message queue.
jessaustin 10y ago
This is awesome: when one clicks on "Language Details"... Makefile 1.2% CMake 0.8% QMake 0.4% That is a highly optimized build process.
dvdplm 10y ago
Do you have any performance numbers for other non-Node WS libraries, e.g. Go (stdlib and gorilla), Rust (ws-rs, mio-websocket etc), Python, Ruby? Would be super interesting to see!
- socmag 10y ago
  Doesn't really answer your question directly, but this was posted fairly recently. https://hashrocket.com/blog/posts/websocket-shootout https://hashrocket.com/blog/posts/websocket-shootout I've used websocketpp in the past (in C++), with fairly good results, but uWebSockets is in a whole other league; especially in a multi-threaded server.
  - alexhultman 10y ago
    That's cool. Yeah WebSocket++ is a really good project and I do respect the author (I used it as point of reference when building µWS). So if WebSocket++ beats all other implementations by a large margin then µWS would obviously beat those other implementations too.

123 points by alexhultman 10y ago

k__ 10y ago

I like it. All the nice optimizations that you only can do if you know what's happening in the background. I read post about how Bluebird Promise implementation is more efficient than others and it was basically stuff like storing state as binary flags instead of boolean vars etc. pp.

wolframhempel 10y ago

congratulations, amazing release. Very much looking forward to working together on https://deepstream.io/ https://deepstream.io/

cheez 10y ago
Can I ask: how do you guys fund stuff like deepstream.io? Do you develop it for specific projects?
- wolframhempel 10y ago
  we're working on building a new kind of realtime data platform. The aim was to base it on a powerful open source core and release that first to alleviate concerns around vendor lock-in and third-party risk when using a PaaS offering.
  - seeekr 10y ago
    I think the GP wanted to know: How do you finance development like this? As in, it seems like a lot of work, how do you sustain yourselves financially while noone is (yet) paying for using the fruit of the work?
    - wolframhempel 10y ago
      It's a good question. Going down that route takes a significant amount of time before one can expect the first paying user. We've originally funded it out of our own pocket and later raised VC funding for the project as well http://venturebeat.com/2016/04/07/deepstreamhub-raises-1-million-for-real-time-app-development-platform/ http://venturebeat.com/2016/04/07/deepstreamhub-raises-1-mil...

lpinca 10y ago

Congrats for this achievement. For anyone using this in Node.js I strongly suggest to run your own benchmarks as uws is no way 47x 18x 33x and 2x times faster/more lightweight than ws. Also check how the improvements are obtained.

yasserf 10y ago
We moved to using uWS for deepstream.io 1.0 release and had great feedback from the community. To literally quote a user in production: 'After we upgraded to deepstream 1.0 we are seeing that the resource consumption is about 50% of what is was before so we still have growing space on our servers'. This was for the 0.7 release so I'm excited to see if 0.10 reduces this even further.
- lpinca 10y ago
  Yes, for 100k connection, using Alex's own benchmarks I saw that uws is up to 2x faster/more lightweight than ws except for the short message throughput where uws really shines and is up to 10x faster. It is a lot, don't get me wrong but the numbers on the README are obtained comparing the C++ server with ws which is totally wrong imho.
Kiro 10y ago
What do you mean when you say ws? Isn't uws just a library for ws?
- lpinca 10y ago
  `ws` is another popular WebSocket implementation for Node.js
- k__ 10y ago
  WebSockets is the protocol, ws is a lib implementing it.
- alexhultman 10y ago
  uws is a reimplementation of the ws interface, using fewer resources and providing better throughput.

socmag 10y ago

We are using uWS for our platform which is completely written in native C++. I haven't tested the scalability to a million clients, but I have no reason to doubt it could handle it. On the other hand, I have tested with 20k clients each sending 100 x 128 byte messages a second. So I've tried pumping 2 million messages a second through our platform (which is at the envelope of my expected load), and the server just sits there and takes it. At these levels saturating the network interface is the main issue. I've also tried it in single core, 4 core, 8 core and 20 core threaded configurations. Everything works as it should and contention is quite minimal. The ability to achieve that over WebSockets is largely due to the work Alex has done (and continues to do) to squeeze every last ounce out of the stack. As far as I'm concerned uWebSockets 0.10.0 is rock solid and at the point where using it in production is totally fine. I can totally recommend it. Congrats on the release Alex and thanks for the lib!

Matthias247 10y ago
Did you also perform some tests with slow clients (or ones that do not receive data at all)? These are the situations where it usually gets a lot more interesting. E.g. if the library just buffers messages all the way until they can be sent you might get out of memory sooner or later.
- socmag 10y ago
  Ah well we have high level policy to deal with obnoxious clients. We will forcibly boot a client if it exceeds certain limits. This is imposed at the application layer. But no I haven't explicitly tested with thousands of leaky clients.
- alexhultman 10y ago
  You can register callbacks to the send calls so that you can keep track of the built up "to be sent" message queue.

jessaustin 10y ago

This is awesome: when one clicks on "Language Details"... Makefile 1.2% CMake 0.8% QMake 0.4% That is a highly optimized build process.

dvdplm 10y ago

Do you have any performance numbers for other non-Node WS libraries, e.g. Go (stdlib and gorilla), Rust (ws-rs, mio-websocket etc), Python, Ruby? Would be super interesting to see!

socmag 10y ago
Doesn't really answer your question directly, but this was posted fairly recently. https://hashrocket.com/blog/posts/websocket-shootout https://hashrocket.com/blog/posts/websocket-shootout I've used websocketpp in the past (in C++), with fairly good results, but uWebSockets is in a whole other league; especially in a multi-threaded server.
- alexhultman 10y ago
  That's cool. Yeah WebSocket++ is a really good project and I do respect the author (I used it as point of reference when building µWS). So if WebSocket++ beats all other implementations by a large margin then µWS would obviously beat those other implementations too.