We are trying out an option of having multiple parallel thread meaning multiple consuming for different set of keywords by establishing single connection. Is it possible or should we establish new connection if we want to consume another set of data? Can anyone guide on this
Regards,
Balaji D
This is documented on DataSift's Multiple Streaming docs page. Some of the official API Client Libraries also support multi-streaming over WebSockets.
Related
I want to implement a peer-to-peer video chat feature for a web application I am currently developing. After doing my research, I've decided that using webRTC's Javascript APIs is the way to go. The application uses AngularJS in the front end and Ruby on Rails in the back end. The main issue I'm encountering while conceptualizing this application is linking the front end with the backend, and creating and maintaining the connection between user streams.
For the signaling aspect of the network, I want to utilize ActionController::Live and the Ruby gem em-event source to push live messages from the server to users and indicate which of their connections are online. Then, when they are ready to make a connection, they will create a custom room and the URL will be sent to the user that they wish to connect with, creating their offer. Once the user clicks on the link sent to them, they send back their answer. When the user responds, the ICE candidate process will begin for each of the users. Do you think that this is a sufficient signaling channel to set up the PeerConnection? What other major players am I missing?
From the research that I have done about WebRTC's RTCPeerConnection, once the initial connection is set up, and both users have public IP addresses corresponding to their stream, the connection is sustained through RTCPeerConnection, more specifically getPeerConnection(). Am I wrong? Are there other factors that I am not considering?
WebRTC makes the process of creating MediaStreams very simple with their getUserMedia method. Once these streams are created they can be added to the RTCPeerConnection that was established. Both as local and remote streams.
If you have any other suggestions for me, please let me know. I want to create this feature using webRTC, it seems like so much fun
There are certainly many ways to handle the call signaling so I'm not going to comment specifically on your approach. I will say that if you plan on supporting ICE trickling the ICE candidates will start flowing very early in the process so you really need an open signalling channel between your peers almost immediately when trying to connect to a peer.
We developed our solution for WebSphere on top of MQTT which is an open, and very simple pub/sub protocol. You can use any open MQTT broker with the protocol and there are a number of open source components available to make WebRTC development extremely easy including an AngularJS WebRTC module (angular-rtcomm), a core pure JavaScript module and much more. We also released a simple JSON based protocol as part of this open source solution. You can take a look at the signaling protocol. You can also read more details about the overall solution here (www.wasdev.net/webrtc). Here you'll find the base JavaScript libraries as well as a number of open source sample solutions. All of these can be forked on github.
In general you want to build your signaling on a protocol that will allow you to grow over time. It should work well for the web and mobile apps. From our experience it took a lot of time to get all this to work well and our goal was to not only support peer-to-peer calls but to support using media resources like Dialogic's XMS PowerMedia server on the backend for multiway support, record/playback and more. We also needed to support federation via SIP trunking so we wanted to make sure the protocol could be easily translated to SIP signaling while also supporting transcoding between media protocols like VP8 and H.264.
Note that if you're looking to only support peer-to-peer calling between WebRTC clients you can do that with these rtcomm open source components only, including an open MQTT broker and save yourself a ton of time. You can literally get something up and running in a matter of hours. The developer version of the WebSphere Liberty beta with the new rtcomm-1.0 service enabled also includes a built in MQTT broker and supports the open WebRTC signaling protocol linked above. You can use WebSphere for development and deploy a single server of this in production for free. You can also use Ruby on Rails with Liberty as well if you'd like.
Even if you decide not to use Liberty you can use all the open source components along with something like Mosquito (which is an open source MQTT broker) to get a solution off the ground quickly. There are also a number of MQTT clients available for many different programming languages including JavaScript, Java, etc. Check out https://eclipse.org/paho/. If you decide to build you're own signaling protocol you might still find these open source components helpful to see how we approached integration with the WebRTC PeerConnection.
I'm working to port some data access to dynamo DB in a high-traffic app. A bit of background - the app collects a very high volume of data, and some specific tables were causing performance issues in a traditional DB. So with a bit of re-design and some changes to the data layout we have been able to make them fit the DynamoDB niche nicely.
My question is around the use/creation of the client object. The SDK docs suggest it is better to create one client and share it amongst multiple threads, so in my repository implementation I have the client defined as a lazy singleton. This means it will be created once and all requests will share the same client (currently around 4000 requests per minute, but likely to grow massively as we come out of beta and start promoting the product).
Does anyone have any experience of making the AWS SDK scale?
Thanks
Sam
When you create one client and share it with multiple threads, only one thread can use the client at one point of time in some SDK.
Definitely if you create separate clients for different threads, it is going to slow down the process.
So I would suggest you to take a middle approach here,
Maximize the HTTP connection pooling size, so that more number of clients are allowed to be created.
And then you follow the sharing of client objects.
Batch operation can be used for .Net aws sdk
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/BatchOperationsORM.html
I have a software architecture problem.
I have to design an IOS application which will communicate with a Linux application to get the state of a sensor, and to publish an actuator command. The two applications run in a Local network with an Ad-Hoc WiFi connection between the IOS device and the Linux computer.
So I have to synchronize two values between two applications (as described in figure 1). In a Linux/Linux system, I resolve this kind of problem thanks to any publisher / subscriber middleware. But how can I solve this problem in an IOS / Linux world ?
Actually the Linux application embed an asynchronous TCP Server, and the IOS application is an asynchronous TCP client. Both applications communicate through the TCP Socket. I think that this method is a low level method, and I would like to migrate the communication layer to a much higher level Service based communication framework.
After some bibliographic research I found three ways to resolve my problem :
The REST Way :
I can create a RESTful Web Service which modelize the sensor state, and which is able to send command to the actuator. An implementation of a RESTful web service client exists for IOS, that is "RESTKit", and I think I can use Apache/Axis2 on the server side.
The RPC Way :
I can create on my Linux computer a RPC service provider thanks to the libmaia. On the IOS side, I can use xmlrpc (https://github.com/eczarny/xmlrpc). My two programs will communicate thanks to the service described in the figure below.
The ZeroConf way :
I didn't get into detail of this methods, but I suppose I can use Bonjour on the IOS side, and AVAHI on the linux side. And then create custom service like in RPC on both side.
Discussion about these methods :
The REST way doesn't seem to be the good way because : "The REST interface is designed to be efficient for large-grain hypermedia data transfer" (from the Chapter 5 of the Fielding dissertation). My data are very fined grain data, because my command is just a float, and my sensor state too.
I think there is no big difference between the ZeroConf way and the RPC Way. ZeroConf provide "only" the service discovering mechanism, and I don't need this kind of mechanism because my application is a rigid application. Both sides knows which services exists.
So my question are :
Does XML RPC based method are the good choice to solve my problem of variable synchronization between an iPhone and a Computer ?
Does it exist other methods ?
I actually recommend you use "tcp socket + protobuf" for your application.
Socket is very efficient in pushing messages to your ios app and protobuf can save your time to deliver a message instead of character bytes. Your other high level proposal actually introduces more complications...
I can provide no answers; just some things to consider in no particular order.
I am also assuming that your model is that the iOS device polls the server to synchronize state.
It is probably best to stay away from directly using Berkeley sockets on the iOS device. iOS used to have issues with low level sockets not connecting after a period of inactivity. At the very least I would use NSStream or CFStream objects for transport or, if possible, I'd use NSURL, NSURLConnection, NSURLRequest. NSURLConnection's asynchronous data loading capability fits well with iOS' gui update loop.
I think you will have to implement some form of data definition language independent of your implementation method (RES, XML RPC, CORBA, roll your own, etc.)
The data you send and receive over the wire would probably be XML or JSON. If you use XML you would have to write your own XML document handler as iOS implements the NSXMLParser class but not the NSXMLDocument class. I would refer JSON as the JSON parser will return an NSArray or NSDictionary hierarchy of NSObjects containing the unserialized data.
I have worked on a GSOAP implementation that used CFStreams for transport. Each request and response was handled by a request specific class to create request specific objects. Each new request required a new class definition for the returned data. Interactivity was maintained by firing the requests through an NSOperationQueue. Lots of shim here. The primary advantage of this method was that the interface was defined in a wsdl schema (all requests, responses, and data structures were defined in one place.
I have not looked at CORBA on iOS - you would have to tie in C++ libraries to your code and change the transport to use CFStreams Again, lots of shim but the advantage of having the protocol defined in the idl file. Also you would have a single connection to the server instead of making and breaking TCP connections for each request.
My $.02
XML RPC and what you refer to as "RESTful Web Service" will both get the job done. If you can use JSON instead of XML as the payload format, that would simplify things somewhat on the iOS side.
Zeroconf (aka bonjour) can be used in combination with either approach. In your case it would allow the client to locate the server dynamically, as an alternative to hard-coding an URL or other address in the client. Zeroconf doesn't play any role in actual application-level data transfer.
You probably want to avoid having the linux app call the iOS app, since that will complicate the iOS app a lot, plus it will be hard on the battery.
You seem to have cherry picked some existing technologies and seem to be trying to make them fit the problem.
I would like to migrate the communication layer to a much higher level Service based communication framework
Why?
You should be seeking the method which meets your requirements in terms of available resources (should you assume that the client can maintain a consistent connection? how secure does it need to be?) However besides functionality, availability and security, the biggest concern should be how to implement this with the least amount of effort.
I'd be leaning towards the REST aproach because:
I do a lot of web development so that's where my skills lie
it has minimal dependencies
there is well supported code implementing the protocol stack at both ends
it's trivial to replace either end of the connection to test out the implementation
it's trivial to monitor the communications (if they're not encrypted) to test the implementaiton
adding encryption / authentication does not change the data exchange
Regards your citation, no HTTP is probably not the most sensible for SCADA - but then neither is iOS.
I have a server and some clients (about 50) in an intranet. The clients send short (about 40 character) string data to the server and the server answers with a similar string. There are up to (but not permanently) 2-3 requests per second for each client. The server has to serialize the requests to get the response strings.
The system should have as less as possible impact on the network as possible (i.e. the server may run something like a webserver already). It should be as easy to install and administer as possible.
What are the possibilities to achieve this using Delphi (Client: D7, Server up to D2010)?
I use the Synapse library for such a simple server. Its lightning fast, very light, and threads easily. The demo Echo in the main synapse install is a fantastic start for what your trying to do. If you are going to be performing database access inside each request/response thread then I strongly also suggest looking at the connection pool example by Cary Jensen to keep your database connections in check.
TCP, definitely. But I'd like to give a vote for ICS. Never liked Indy ...
What about Indy's TIdTCPServer and TIdTCPClient? They provide command handlers, which makes implementing text-based protocols very straight-forward.
There are a lot of options.
Ultimately, I agree with Smasher and like using sockets. They're quick, easy and portable. If you're dealing with a fairly simple protocol and don't need a full n-tier solution, creating a TCP or HTTP server application is dead simple, very light weight, and easy to make compatible with any client. You can even add SSL support to these stand alone applications without having to configure a web server or interfering with it, if it's already running on the same box.
I use RemObjects SDK for this sort of purpose. It takes care of all the difficult stuff, and I just ask it to connect and make function calls to pass the data.
I have heard that web-based chat clients tend to use networking frameworks such as the twisted framework.
But would it be possible to build a web-based chat client without a networking framework - using only ajax connections?
I would like to build a session-based one-to-one web chat client that uses sessions to indicate when a chat has ended. Would this be possible in Rails using only ajax and without a networking framework?
What effect does it have to use a networking framework and what impact would it have on my app to not use one? Also any general recommendations for approaching this project would be appreciated.
If i understand you correctly, you want to have to clients connect to you server and send messaged to each other to each other through ajax, via the server.
This is possible, there are two approaches to do this.
The easy approach is to have both client poll every few seconds to check for new messages posted by the other. Drawback is that the messages are not instantly delivered. I think this is an example found in the rails book.
The more complex approach is to keep an open connection and sent the messages to the client as soon as they are received by the server. To do this you can use something like Juggernaut
I would like to add that though the latter works, it is not something http was meant for and it a bit of hack, but hey, whatever gets the job done. A working example of this is the rails chat project which uses a juggernaut derivative.
Technically speaking every network based application has a networking framework under it and, therefore, is socket based...
The only real question here is whether you want to have all that chatter go through your server or allow point to point communication. If the former, you can use the ajax framework to talk to your web server. This means that all of your clients will be constantly polling the web server for updates.
If the later, then you have to allow direct tcp connections between the two clients and need to get a little closer to the metal so to speak.
So, ask yourself this: Do you want to pay for the traffic costs AND have potential liability over divulging whatever it is that people might be typing into their client; or, would you rather just build a chat program that people can use to talk to each other?
Of course, before even going that far, do you really want to build yet another chat client? That space is already pretty crowded.