I've been looking into sockjs-tornado recently and am working on a chat function for a social networking site. I'm trying to get a feel for common methods used in building scalable multiroom chat functionality. I'll outline a couple of the methods I've thought of and I'd like to get feedback. What methods are used in the real world? What are the advantages and disadvantages to these methods?
Prereqs:
running tornado
using sockjs-tornado lib
sockjs-client lib for js
Everything else is open.
Methods I've considered:
For loop
This seems like the simplest way to go. You create a user class that subscribes to certain room classes. The user sends a message class that contains a room id and the server redirects the message in the loop only to users that have subscribed to that room. This seems to me to be by far the worst because the complexity is obviously at least linear. (Imagine 500 users connected at once to 5 chat rooms each.)
Multi-tasking/multiple server instances
This also seems like a bad idea because you could have 500 server instances running at any time on... different ports? I'm really not sure on the implementation of this method.
Native support
Now granted, a lot of libraries have this built in such as socketio. However that's not an option due to the sole node.js support. (I'm on tornado server.) Socks in particular does not have built in support for multiple "rooms".
Conclusion
I'm looking for resources/case studies, and industry standards. Any help would be appreciated.
I would just use a message queue server like RabbitMQ with a fanout exchange as each "chat room".
You can see an example of using a fanout exchange in Python here.
The Pika AMQP library works with Tornado, too.
The advantage with using a message queueing system is that you can have users connected to different Tornado processes on different servers while still being in the same "room", giving you high availability on the HTTP layer.
RabbitMQ also has HA capabilities (although not the greatest).
I've created a simple game where 2 players make a simultaneous choice in each round, and the winner of the round is determined by a set of rules specific to the game. Sort of like how Rock Paper Scissors works.
I'd like to be able to offer this game online where 2 players can find and play against each other. There would be some central server to arbitrate the game, and then each player would interact with the game using some game client of his choice that we would provide (i.e. web-based, mobile-based, Flash, etc).
Obviously, a player could also play against a computer opponent that we could provide. I'd also like to have the capability to allow programmers to submit computer programs that they've written to act as players and play against other programs in some sort of tournament.
I realize that the specifics of my game would certainly need to be written from scratch, but it seems that all of the work that the servers would have to do to communicate with the clients and maintain the state of the game has probably been done many times before. This is probably the bulk of the work.
Does anyone have any ideas for how this could be done quickly and easily? Are there servers available with some sort of standard interface to drop new games into? Is there some sort of open source game server? How would you go about doing this?
Seeing as the clients only communicate with the game server occasionally (as opposed to continuously), a web framework should be able to serve as your "basic game server". While web frameworks may be made for providing "web pages", they can certainly be (ab)used to serve as request handlers.
This certainly doesn't force you to make the game a browser game; standalone game clients can be made easily, and they can communicate with your game server using basic http. I also heard this thing called Ajax is pretty nifty for such things.
Not only will you find a lot of ready-made http-based servers, as an added bonus, there is a lot more documentation on how to work with Web 2.0®©™ than "game servers". You just need to know that you want a web framework that lets you easily manage sessions and receive/respond to requests and a client library that does likewise.
As an added aside, "maintaining the state of the game", as you put it, falls 100% within the domain of the actual game logic. But many web frameworks come with good database support, and will surely be useful for this kind of thing.
What is a good framework to build a multiplayer game in Actionscript?
I want to create a multiplayer 2D shooter like Asteroids on the Blackberry Playbook; my main concern is latency - a shooter wouldn't be fun if the bullets are super-jerky and unexpectedly hit people.
I'm guessing that a UDP-based framework would be the best. Can anyone point me to the right direction?
There are many things you can use off the shelf but the basic setup is very simple but you have a few options.
The most common is server push, things like Flash Media Server, LiveCycle Data Services from Adobe or other tools like SmartFoxServer can do this. With this setup the server saves the connections to everyone that connects to the server and passes or "pushes" applications state to the people connected every time the data changes in the application.
Another option is called long pulling, this can be done with any web server really. How this works is the data stores the state of the application, when the application starts it calls the server, when it responds the client calls the server again.
There are a few other ways to do it but these are the most common. But this has nothing to do with protocol like HTTP, UDP, AMF, XMPP, or whatever else. The protocol is the format that the data is sent. With these out of the box servers they normally output a few of these but the fastest formats are binary like AMF but not always the best, there are advantages to each, because each gives you different features for keeping track of things.
If you are talking about have a game that takes over the world that has millions of users then you need to think about scaling and what happens when you need two or 100 servers and how do they talk to each other. But for now keep in mind that the more the server does the slower it will get, if you are sending small amounts of data it will be able to handle more users. Stick with making one efficient server and worry about that later if you get there.
You also need to thing about what server side programming language you want to mess with if any. Some services don't let you do anything, these normally cost money and don't do as much. Adobe likes Java but there are servers that output all of these protocols in most every language. My favorit lately has been Node.js a super fast way to run JavaScript on the server. Node.js has a built in HTTP server but it is just as easy to create a simple server that sends basic text through a Socket or XMLSocket. A server like this will easily handle many thousands of users. There are many games that use Socket.IO and if you want to see a simple example of what I'm talking about you can check out this.
Assuming you want to use Flash/Flex and not Java (Blackberry/Android) or native SDKs for Playbook -
There is a book as an inspiration: http://www.packtpub.com/flash-10-multiplayer-game-essentials/book it uses Pulse SDK at the server side. But you could use an own sockets-program on the server side. I use Perl as TCP-sockets server (sends gzipped XML around) in a small card game but this wouldn't work for your shooter.
Flash does not support UDP out of the box
But there is peer-to-peer networking protocol RTMFP in the upcoming Flash Media Server Enterprise 4 (price is out of reach for mere mortals)
So your best bet is to buy an Amazon-service for RTMFP then you can pay-per-use and stay scalable...
You can either do a constant post/get request with the server to get data for the game, but for a multiplayer shooter i'd surgest SmartFoxServer: http://www.smartfoxserver.com/
Out of the box, Adobe AIR supports UDP through datagram packets.
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/air/reference/html/flash/net/DatagramSocket.html
I couldn't find a particular networking API for flash, but perhaps you can build one. Libgren is open source and you can use that for reference.
You can also look into RTMFP though it's focus is on transmitting audio/video and some messages (through TCP I think).
What problem do MOM (Message Oriented Middleware) solve? Scalability? Integration?
In which domain are they typically used and in which domains are they typically not used?
For example, say, is Google using such solution for it's main search engine or to power GMail?
What about big websites like Walmart, eBay, FedEx (pretty much a Java shop) and buy.com (pretty much an MS shop)? Does MOM solve a need there?
Does it make any sense when you're writing a Webapp where you control the server-side and have an homogenous environment (say tens of Amazon EC2 instances all running Linux + Java JVMs) there and where the clients are, well, Web browsers?
Does it make sense for desktop apps that need to communicate with a server?
Or is it 'only' for big enterprise stuff where you typically have a happy mix of countless of different systems that needs to communicate in a way or another?
I'm a bit confused as to what they're useful for and I think that with example of where they're appropriate and where they're not appropriate I could better understand their use.
This is a great question.
The main uses of messaging are: scaling, offloading work, integration, monitoring, event handling, routing, networking, push, mobility, buffering, queueing, task sharing, alerts, management, logging, batch, data delivery, pubsub, multicast, audit, scheduling, ... and more. Basically: anything where you need data but don't want to make a database request. (Caching is another, longer story).
Another way of looking at this is to notice that many applications used to be built by assuming that users (people) would perform actions that would be fulfilled by executing a transaction on a database (including reads, writes). But today, many actions are not user-initiated. Instead they are application-initiated. For example "tell me when the book that I want to buy is in stock". The best way to solve this class of problems is with messaging of some sort. Whether you call it middleware or web push or real time salad dressing does not matter. It's all messaging.
When you enable applications to initiate or react to events, then it is much easier to scale because your architecture can be based on loosely coupled components. It is also much easier to integrate those components if your messaging is based on a stable, scalable, serviceable tool, preferably using open standard APIs and protocols.
I hope this helps. We try to maintain a list of useful links about messaging here
Please get in touch with questions and comments on any of this, we are dead easy to find.
To address your specific questions:
In which domain are they typically used and in which domains are they typically not used?
Like databases, messaging systems crop up everywhere.
For example, say, is Google using such solution for it's main search engine or to power GMail?
Google uses a lot of home grown technology, but a lot of their open source contributions and known use cases suggest that messaging is (or should be) central to some of the main services.
What about big websites like Walmart, eBay, FedEx (pretty much a Java shop) and buy.com (pretty much an MS shop)? Does MOM solve a need there?
Very much so.
An example use case is scaling web page requests. When the user makes a web request, the web server puts it onto a queue for background processing. This means that the web server can keep working while the request is processed. It also means that the web server does not need to know how the request is handled, making system maintenance, upgrade and rollback much simpler because the main parts are 'decoupled'.
So, anyway, the web request gets processed by a back end service, or possibly by many services, eg 'look up book titles', 'draw shopping cart', 'get advertisement', 'check user account'... Finally all the results get put onto another queue, ready for collection and user response by the web server. Typically the system will include a timeout of around 100ms so that any late requests just get thrown away. The user sees anything that got processed in the time interval. This is one reason why some large ecommerce sites have pages that appear to load in stages.
There are many more use cases...
Does it make any sense when you're writing a Webapp where you control the server-side and have an homogenous environment (say tens of Amazon EC2 instances all running Linux + Java JVMs) there and where the clients are, well, Web browsers?
Definitely. If you have an unknown, or unbounded, number of users, server side instances, and application latencies, then it makes sense to use messaging, even if just as a scalable substrate for non-blocking RPC.
Does it make sense for desktop apps that need to communicate with a server?
In lots of cases. One very common case is when the server pushes events to the desktop app, eg game event, tweets, price feeds in finance, system alerts....
Or is it 'only' for big enterprise stuff where you typically have a happy mix of countless of different systems that needs to communicate in a way or another?
Definitely not only for those 'legacy integration' cases but they are important too. At RabbitMQ, the biggest customers we have in terms of pure scale or message volume are cloud providers and big web application providers.
I will answer only one answer, from prior experience - take a look at this middle-ware that is employed by big companies here - middle-ware has one purpose - to glue dis-connected systems (written in disparate languages) together so that they can interact with one another and streamline the business process - Entera as I have had experience with, creates a middle layer in which the unix box using processes written in C, interact with the mainframe system (DB2, COBOL) via a front-end written in PowerBuilder (I am not naming the company!).
From the description I have given, Entera is a middle-ware which hosts a number of things - smooth integration of the flow of data regardless of the endian format, ability for different languages to talk to the middle-ware broker (a broker is a CORBA or DCE like process, that conforms to 'The Open Group) that listens on a particular port) and is specified by an IDL which makes a process appear to be local - if you understand the terminology used in Remoting under Microsoft's .NET Framework, you are not far off the mark! The middle-ware generates stubs which are linked at compile-time and manages the creation of the process, hosting it off a port, multi-threading at run-time, and also, the modern front-ends (such as .NET, Java, PowerBuilder even the unspeakable VB6...ok...VB.NET for the purists out there) can interact by opening a connection to the specified port on a particular IP address, and using the stubs generated, can interact with it directly.
Obviously, from what was described you can see how the legacy systems can have new life breathed into it and thus scalability of the process, the major downside of this is the cost factor which can run into thousdands of dollars. Big companies who uses mainframes as their back-end processing systems for billing/invoicing, who generate a huge revenue can obviously afford such an expensive product - to them it would seem like throwing pennies into a pool of water...because of the use of middle-ware which prolongs the business process, and breathe new life into it, can extend the business by a good number of years into the future without worrying about 'legacy' tag attached to it.
Incidentally, I carried this out as part of my thesis for my BSc. in Information Systems which covered this commercial front-end. There was an open source version of the middle-ware available on sourceforge called FreeDCE, but development efforts have declined or stopped.
Edit:
#cocotwo: That is exactly what middle-ware does as you said it is a plumbing tool...message oriented middle-ware is not really heard of AFAIK because I would imagine, the processes (functions) would need to be called as if they are locally visible within the application domain of the front-end to make it easy to interact with.
Using messages may have its advantages over RPC calls in that the messages are queued in a safe-holding area in the event that a network disconnection occurs - there may be some data caching going on within that aspect to allow the front-end to continue regardless...it would be useful in the instances of 'updating a status of a particular billing/invoice number' - a one-way write-data to the back-end via the middle-ware.
Ok, big companies would have advanced systems infrastructure in that technicians are constantly around the clock to ensure a smooth delivery of data-flow so that would have to be factored in. The company that I worked with had IBM Global Support contract to fulfill in order to ensure a maximum uptime 99% with 6 nine's after the decimal point...with hot-swapping/balanced-clusters/mirroring systems in place...
Whereas with RPC, if the disconnection occurs, the front-end would have to be restarted or would have to handle the disconnection event. It really depends if the message-queueing middle-ware handles each message in real-time and pass back results to the front-end immediately...
This is where each (Message-queueing and RPC related middle-ware) have their strengths and weaknesses...and also the cost mitigation factor such as support, maximum up-time, development efforts and training - that's a biggie here as middle-ware are really proprietary (despite following the 'The Open Group' layout/standards) and complex to setup and to glue the whole thing together via scripts.
Good answers and discussion here. Our consulting team has two preferred "messaging" solutions: RabittMQ and NXTera a high speed RPC middleware, the contemporary version of Entera mentioned above. My partners and I have developed several solutions using RabittMQ, it is the best tool available in that space right now. Additionally, I happen to work for the company that makes NXTera/Entera.
From experience I can clearly say that both of these products meet the need for reliability and low maintenance as discussed above. There are situations where a messaging service, like RabittMQ, is the right choice -- where Publish and subscribe, certified delivery, Queuing or store-and-forward are required.
In other cases, RPC's (remote procedure calls) are the best and fastest solutions for transactional and distributed processing for enterprise or cloud-based applications. When it is right to use an RPC, but SOAP/.NET (yes these are RPC implementations) are too slow, expensive or complex, a lightwieght high speed RPC middleware like NXTera/Entera is the right choice for us.
There is some use case overlap between RPC middleware and message oriented middleware, and where there are you can use either successfully. But both are strong and dependable choices.
The large companies I work with use both RPC and MoM side-by-side. As far as Internet companies, Google (Protocol Buffers) and Facebook (Thrift) show that RPC's have a roll to play in modern web and cloud-based development.
Would Director be an option for creating a socket client?
My client needs to accept server commands; frame rate, start etc.
Director seems like it was made for controlling movies. I've got Director 11.5 at the office. Any lingo experts that could advise?
Interaction with client
SERVER==>XML PACKET==>CLIENT==>swf plays on given frame and duration
Links
http://www.adobe.com/support/director/multiuser.html
http://www.adobe.com/products/director/multiuser/
http://smbus.org/specs/
http://opensmus.sourceforge.net/
Just found this
http://www.director-online.com/buildArticle.php?id=1158
Director does not natively support creating socket connections.
There is an Xtra for communicating with servers using text connections, called the Multiuser Xtra. It doesn't provide a full suite of socket commands, but it will allow you to open a connection to an arbitrary server and send messages back and forth. It has two modes: one that uses just a raw text connection (similar to telnet, and would require you to essentially roll your own server), and one which talks to the "Shockwave Multiuser Server" via the proprietary SMUS protocol. The "Shockwave Multiuser Server" provides services like matchmaking, forwarding messages to groups, etc., but it has been de-supported by Adobe, so most Director developers, I'd wager, are skittish on basing any long-term projects on it. There are third-party alternatives available such as OpenSMUS, but you'd still be dependent on Adobe to continue supporting the Xtra.
If you want to continue down this path, I'd recommend going to the OpenSMUS site - there's a community and code samples available there.
Another possibility is to do your networking through a Flash object and embed the Flash object into Director. Since you're coming from a Flex/as3 background, apparently, that might be a better migration for you - you could do the networking stuff in Flash, and build the rest of your client in Director. This might be your best bet, especially if you already have some Flash-based infrastructure built for your project.