uWebSockets vs ws

Overview

Stacks1.2K

Followers190

Votes0

GitHub Stars22.5K

Forks2.5K

uWebSockets

Stacks16

Followers52

Votes0

GitHub Stars18.5K

Forks1.8K

uWebSockets vs ws: What are the differences?

Performance: uWebSockets is known for its high-performance capabilities, providing efficient and scalable communication between the server and the clients. It utilizes asynchronous I/O and optimized memory management to handle a large number of concurrent connections. On the other hand, ws may not offer the same level of performance as uWebSockets due to its reliance on Node.js's standard libraries for handling WebSocket communications.
API Design and Usability: uWebSockets has a simple and intuitive API design, making it easy to use and understand. It provides clean abstractions for managing WebSocket connections and handling events. In contrast, ws offers a more flexible and versatile API that allows developers to have more control over the WebSocket communication process. However, this increased flexibility can make the API more complex and may require a steeper learning curve for beginners.
Binary Support: uWebSockets provides built-in support for sending and receiving binary data over WebSocket connections. This allows developers to efficiently transfer binary data such as images, audio, or video without the need for additional encoding or decoding. On the other hand, ws may require additional code or libraries to handle binary data effectively, potentially adding complexity to the development process.
Scalability: uWebSockets is designed to be highly scalable, allowing developers to handle a large number of concurrent connections with minimal resource consumption. It achieves this scalability through the use of asynchronous I/O and event-driven programming. While ws can also handle a decent number of concurrent connections, it may not offer the same level of scalability as uWebSockets when dealing with a significantly large number of clients.
WebSocket Extensions: uWebSockets supports various WebSocket extensions that enable additional functionality beyond the standard WebSocket protocol. These extensions can include compression, authentication, or custom protocols, enhancing the capabilities of the WebSocket communication. However, ws may have limited or no support for such extensions, restricting the ability to add extra functionality to the WebSocket protocol.
WebSocket Server Clustering: uWebSockets provides built-in support for WebSocket server clustering, allowing developers to scale WebSocket servers across multiple machines or processes. This clustering capability ensures high availability, fault tolerance, and efficient utilization of resources. Conversely, ws may not offer this built-in clustering functionality, requiring developers to implement custom solutions for WebSocket server clustering.

In Summary, uWebSockets outshines ws in terms of performance, API design, binary support, scalability, WebSocket extensions, and WebSocket server clustering.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on ws, uWebSockets

Anil

Mar 7, 2020

Needs advice

I want to add uWebSockets.js in my application for real-time chatting, for that, I have to draw a UML and ufd diagram flow then I have to implement it in my code, my stack is node js, android, express, MongoDB, Redis. how can I do this? I want to add uWebSockets.js in my application for real-time chatting, for that, I have to draw a UML and ufd diagram flow then I have to implement it in my code, my stack is node js, android, express, MongoDB, Redis. how can I do this?I want to add uWebSockets.js in my application for real-time chatting, for that, I have to draw a UML and ufd diagram flow then I have to implement it in my code, my stack is node js, android, express, MongoDB, Redis. how can I do this?i want to add uWebSockets.js in my application for real time chatting, for that i have to draw a uml and ufd diagram flow then i have to implement it in my code , my stack is node js , android , express , mongoDb, redis . how can i do a this?

46.7k views46.7k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

ws	uWebSockets
It is a simple to use, blazing fast, and thoroughly tested WebSocket client and server implementation.	It is a simple to use yet thoroughly optimized implementation of HTTP and WebSockets. It comes with built-in pub/sub support, HTTP routing, TLS 1.3, IPv6, permessage-deflate and is battle tested as one of the most popular implementations, reaching many end-users daily.
Simple to use;Blazing fast;WebSocket client and server for Node.js	HTTP and Websockets;Built-in pub/sub support;HTTP routing
Statistics
GitHub Stars 22.5K	GitHub Stars 18.5K
GitHub Forks 2.5K	GitHub Forks 1.8K
Stacks 1.2K	Stacks 16
Followers 190	Followers 52
Votes 0	Votes 0
Integrations
Node.js	C++ Windows Linux macOS

What are some alternatives to ws, uWebSockets?

Firebase

Firebase is a cloud service designed to power real-time, collaborative applications. Simply add the Firebase library to your application to gain access to a shared data structure; any changes you make to that data are automatically synchronized with the Firebase cloud and with other clients within milliseconds.

Socket.IO

It enables real-time bidirectional event-based communication. It works on every platform, browser or device, focusing equally on reliability and speed.

PubNub

PubNub makes it easy for you to add real-time capabilities to your apps, without worrying about the infrastructure. Build apps that allow your users to engage in real-time across mobile, browser, desktop and server.

Pusher

Pusher is the category leader in delightful APIs for app developers building communication and collaboration features.

SignalR

SignalR allows bi-directional communication between server and client. Servers can now push content to connected clients instantly as it becomes available. SignalR supports Web Sockets, and falls back to other compatible techniques for older browsers. SignalR includes APIs for connection management (for instance, connect and disconnect events), grouping connections, and authorization.

Ably

Ably offers WebSockets, stream resume, history, presence, and managed third-party integrations to make it simple to build, extend, and deliver digital realtime experiences at scale.

Syncano

Syncano is a backend platform to build powerful real-time apps more efficiently. Integrate with any API, minimize boilerplate code and control your data - all from one place.

NATS

Unlike traditional enterprise messaging systems, NATS has an always-on dial tone that does whatever it takes to remain available. This forms a great base for building modern, reliable, and scalable cloud and distributed systems.

SocketCluster

SocketCluster is a fast, highly scalable HTTP + realtime server engine which lets you build multi-process realtime servers that make use of all CPU cores on a machine/instance. It removes the limitations of having to run your Node.js server as a single thread and makes your backend resilient by automatically recovering from worker crashes and aggregating errors into a central log.

deepstream.io

Scalable Server for Realtime Web Apps with JSON structures that can be read, manipulated and listened to, messages that can be sent to one or more subscribers, and request response workflows, between two clients or servers.

Related Comparisons

uWebSockets vs ws: What are the differences?

Performance: uWebSockets is known for its high-performance capabilities, providing efficient and scalable communication between the server and the clients. It utilizes asynchronous I/O and optimized memory management to handle a large number of concurrent connections. On the other hand, ws may not offer the same level of performance as uWebSockets due to its reliance on Node.js's standard libraries for handling WebSocket communications.
API Design and Usability: uWebSockets has a simple and intuitive API design, making it easy to use and understand. It provides clean abstractions for managing WebSocket connections and handling events. In contrast, ws offers a more flexible and versatile API that allows developers to have more control over the WebSocket communication process. However, this increased flexibility can make the API more complex and may require a steeper learning curve for beginners.
Binary Support: uWebSockets provides built-in support for sending and receiving binary data over WebSocket connections. This allows developers to efficiently transfer binary data such as images, audio, or video without the need for additional encoding or decoding. On the other hand, ws may require additional code or libraries to handle binary data effectively, potentially adding complexity to the development process.
Scalability: uWebSockets is designed to be highly scalable, allowing developers to handle a large number of concurrent connections with minimal resource consumption. It achieves this scalability through the use of asynchronous I/O and event-driven programming. While ws can also handle a decent number of concurrent connections, it may not offer the same level of scalability as uWebSockets when dealing with a significantly large number of clients.
WebSocket Extensions: uWebSockets supports various WebSocket extensions that enable additional functionality beyond the standard WebSocket protocol. These extensions can include compression, authentication, or custom protocols, enhancing the capabilities of the WebSocket communication. However, ws may have limited or no support for such extensions, restricting the ability to add extra functionality to the WebSocket protocol.
WebSocket Server Clustering: uWebSockets provides built-in support for WebSocket server clustering, allowing developers to scale WebSocket servers across multiple machines or processes. This clustering capability ensures high availability, fault tolerance, and efficient utilization of resources. Conversely, ws may not offer this built-in clustering functionality, requiring developers to implement custom solutions for WebSocket server clustering.

In Summary, uWebSockets outshines ws in terms of performance, API design, binary support, scalability, WebSocket extensions, and WebSocket server clustering.

uWebSockets vs ws

Overview