3 ms·

Absolutely! I've had terrible experiences with vanilla socket.io regarding reconnections, performance, and reliability. This is even after the 1.0 release. Lat

by yid 11y ago

Absolutely! I've had terrible experiences with vanilla socket.io regarding reconnections, performance, and reliability. This is even after the 1.0 release. Lately, I've been using primus [1], which is an API unification layer for socket.io, sockjs, faye, and native websockets. Swapping one engine for another is trivial, and they've taken pains to abstract a core subset of functionality. [1] https://github.com/primus/primus https://github.com/primus/primus

STRML 11y ago
+1 for Primus. We moved to it on BitMEX from a custom SockJS + Mux-demux setup and the transition was painless. We now get the ability to change transports based on client (so our API clients get the very fast standards-compliant node `ws` library, while browser clients get engine.io). We also gained reliable heartbeating which was a big win. I've found the devteam to be really responsive and their choices of abstractions appear to work well.
amluto 11y ago
Agreed. Mostly quoting myself from earlier this year: I don't normally like bashing open-source projects, but socket.io should not be used. It may be noob-friendly, but that's just because it does things so automatically that you can't really use it correctly. When I was a websockets noob, I used socket.io briefly, and it was a complete waste of time. See, for example, https://github.com/Automattic/socket.io-client/issues/572 https://github.com/Automattic/socket.io-client/issues/572 (closed without comment). SockJS is much better, as is raw websockets. Presumably Primus, too, although I'm a bit surprised that one can come up with a sensible interface that can be layered over both Socket.io and anything else.