this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
87 points (95.8% liked)

Opensource

1325 readers
5 users here now

A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!

CreditsIcon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/39429103

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Wait, why would you not use a websocket for this?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My guess that websocket add additional overhead both in size (header) and complexity as browser and server need to encode/decode it making it more CPU intensive not to mention harder to implement.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I've implemented it myself, down to the encoding and buffer management.

It's a really simple back and forth first, but after that it's just dumping arbitrary binary data through the socket

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but with WebSocket you need to have a server and that will consume some additional CPU.

Without it you only need some random CDN to do the download test.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This server is just a piece of software that accepts and responds to TCP sockets. It could be anything, but you're not consuming more CPU power by doing less work.

The http protocol requires you prepend every message with a bunch of headers and for them to have a static size. (tho plenty of apps allow you to bend the rules quite a bit)

After switching to a websocket, none of that applies. You can just dump data straight into the TCP socket. Or TLS stream that goes into the TCP socket. But that would be same for the http requests

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

On the server side to send you data, using any web server with mmap support will probably be less CPU intensive than app that handles websocket, but yes, the details matter as when reading a lot of small files vs websocket, then websocket could be better for CPU usage especially when you could generate data.

But once again using plain old http allow you to use the speestest software against any CDN very easy IMO.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Adding headers and some other minor requirements is slower than not. That's really the difference, it's not complicated.