(UPDATED: updated to the PR are now reflected in the post)

Something exciting is coming.

Everyone is talking about WebSockets and their older cousin EventSource / Server Sent Events (SSE). Faye and ActionCable are all the rage and real-time updates are becoming easier than ever.

But it’s all a mess. It’s hard to set up, it’s hard to maintain. The performance is meh. In short, the existing design is expensive – it’s expensive in developer hours and it’s expensive in hardware costs.

However, a new PR in the Rack repository promises to change all that in the near future.

This PR is a huge step towards simplifying our code base, improving real-time performance and lowering the overall cost of real-time web applications.

In a sentence, it’s an important step towards decoupling the web application from the web.

Remember, Rack is the interface Ruby frameworks (such and Rails and Sinatra) and web applications use to communicate with the Ruby application servers. It’s everywhere. So this is a big deal.

The Problem in a Nutshell

The problem with the current standard approach, in a nutshell, is that each real-time application process has to run two servers in order to support real-time functionality.

The two servers might be listening on the same port, they might be hidden away in some gem, but at the end of the day, two different IO event handling units have to run side by side.

“Why?” you might ask. Well, since you asked, I’ll tell you (if you didn’t ask, skip to the solution).

The story of the temporary hijack

This is the story of a quick temporary solution coming up on it’s 5th year as the only “standard” Rack solution available.

At some point in our history, the Rack specification needed a way to support long polling and other HTTP techniques. Specifically, Rails 4.0 needed something for their “live stream” feature.

For this purpose, the Rack team came up with the hijack API approach.

This approach allowed for a quick fix to a pressing need. was meant to be temporary, something quick until Rack 2.0 was released (5 years later, the Rack protocol is still at version 1.3).

The hijack API offers applications complete control of the socket. Just hijack the socket away from the server and voilá, instant long polling / SSE support… sort of.

That’s where things started to get messy.

To handle the (now “free”) socket, a lot of network logic had to be copied from the server layer to the application layer (buffering write calls, handling incoming data, protocol management, timeout handling, etc’).

This is an obvious violation of the “S” in S.O.L.I.D (single responsibility), as it adds IO handling responsibilities to the application / framework.

It also violates the DRY principle, since the IO handling logic is now duplicated (once within the server and once within the application / framework).

Additionally, this approach has issues with HTTP/2 connections, since the network protocol and the application are now entangled.

The obvious hijack price

The hijack approach has many costs, some hidden, some more obvious.

The most easily observed price is memory, performance and developer hours.

Due to code duplication and extra work, the memory consumption for hijack based solutions is higher and their performance is slower (more system calls, more context switches, etc’).

Using require 'faye' will add WebSockets to your application, but it will take almost 9Mb just to load the gem (this is before any actual work was performed).

On the other hand, using the agoo or iodine HTTP servers will add both WebScokets and SSE to your application without any extra memory consumption.

To be more specific, using iodine will consume about 2Mb of memory, marginally less than Puma, while providing both HTTP and real-time capabilities.

The hidden hijack price

A more subtle price is higher hardware costs and a lower clients-per-machine ratio when using hijack .

Why?

Besides the degraded performance, the hijack approach allows some HTTP servers to lean on the select system call, (Puma used select last time I took a look).

This system call breaks down at around the 1024 open file limit, possibly limiting each process to 1024 open connections.

When a connection is hijacked, the sockets don’t close as fast as the web server expects, eventually leading to breakage and possible crashes if the 1024 open file limit is exceeded.

The Solution – Callbacks and Events

The new proposed Rack Push PR offers a wonderful effective way to implement WebSockets and SSE while allowing an application to remain totally server agnostic.

This new proposal leaves the responsibility for the network / IO handling with the server, simplifying the application’s code base and decoupling it from the network protocol.

By using a callback object, the application is notified of any events. Leaving the application free to focus on the data rather than the network layer.

The callback object doesn’t even need to know anything about the server running the application or the underlying protocol.

~~The callback object is automatically linked to the correct API using Ruby’s extend approach, allowing the application to remain totally server agnostic.~~ EDIT: the PR was updated, replacing the extend approach with an extra client object.

How it works

Every Rack server uses a Hash type object to communicate with a Rack application.

This is how Rails is built, this is how Sinatra is built and this is how every Rack application / framework is built. It’s in the current Rack specification.

A simple Hello world using Rack would look like this (placed in a file called config.ru ):

# normal HTTP response RESPONSE = [200, { 'Content-Type' => 'text/html', 'Content-Length' => '12' }, [ 'Hello World!' ] ] # note the `env` variable APP = Proc.new {|env| RESPONSE } # The Rack DSL used to run the application run APP

This new proposal introduces the env['rack.upgrade?'] variable.

Normally, this variable is set to nil (or missing from the env Hash).

However, for WebSocket connection, the env['rack.upgrade?'] variable is set to :websocket and for EventSource (SSE) connections the variable is set to :sse .

To set a callback object, the env['rack.upgrade'] is introduced (notice the missing question mark).

Now the design might look like this:

# Place in config.ru RESPONSE = [200, { 'Content-Type' => 'text/html', 'Content-Length' => '12' }, [ 'Hello World!' ] ] # an example Callback class class MyCallbacks def on_open client puts "* Push connection opened." end def on_message client, data puts "* Incoming data: #{data}" client.write "Roger that, \"#{data}\"" end def on_close client puts "* Push connection closed." end end # note the `env` variable APP = Proc.new do |env| if(env['rack.upgrade?']) env['rack.upgrade'] = MyCallbacks.new [200, {}, []] else RESPONSE end end # The Rack DSL used to run the application run APP

Run this application with the Agoo or Iodine servers and let the magic sparkle.

For example, using Iodine:

# install iodine, version 0.6.0 and up gem install iodine # start in single threaded mode iodine -t 1

Now open the browser, visit localhost:3000 and open the browser console to test some JavaScript.

First try an EventSource (SSE) connection (run in browser console):

// An SSE example var source = new EventSource("/"); source.onmessage = function(msg) { console.log(msg.id); console.log(msg.data); };

Sweet! nothing happened just yet (we aren't sending notifications), but we have an open SSE connection!

What about WebSockets (run in browser console):

// A WebSocket example ws = new WebSocket("ws://localhost:3000/"); ws.onmessage = function(e) { console.log(e.data); }; ws.onclose = function(e) { console.log("closed"); }; ws.onopen = function(e) { e.target.send("Hi!"); };

Wow! Did you look at the Ruby console – we have working WebSockets, it's that easy.

And this same example will run perfectly using the Agoo server as well (both Agoo and Iodine already support the Rack Push proposal).

Try it:

# install the agoo server, version 2.1.0 and up gem install agoo # start it up rackup -s agoo -p 3000

Notice, no gems, no extra code, no huge memory consumption, just the Ruby server and raw Rack (I didn't even use a framework just yet).

The amazing push

So far, it's so simple, it's hard to notice how powerful this is.

Consider implementing a stock ticker, or in this case, a timer:

# Place in config.ru RESPONSE = [200, { 'Content-Type' => 'text/html', 'Content-Length' => '12' }, [ 'Hello World!' ] ] # A global live connection storage module LiveList @list = [] @lock = Mutex.new def <<(connection) @lock.synchronize { @list << connection } end def >>(connection) @lock.synchronize { @list.delete connection } end def any? # remove connection to the "live list" @lock.synchronize { @list.any? } end # this will send a message to all the connections that share the same process. # (in cluster mode we get partial broadcasting only and this doesn't scale) def broadcast(data) # copy the list so we don't perform long operations in the critical section tmp = nil # place tmp in this part of the scope @lock.synchronize do tmp = @list.dup # copy list into tmp end # iterate list outside of critical section tmp.each {|c| c.write data } end extend self end # Broadcast the time very second... but... # Threads will BREAK in cluster mode. @thread = Thread.new do while(LiveList.any?) do sleep(1) LiveList.broadcast "The time is: #{Time.now}" end end # an example static Callback module module MyCallbacks def on_open client # add connection to the "live list" LiveList << client end def on_message(client, data) # Just an example broadcast LiveList.broadcast "Special Announcement: #{data}" end def on_close client # remove connection to the "live list" LiveList >> client end extend self end # The Rack application APP = Proc.new do |env| if(env['rack.upgrade?']) env['rack.upgrade'] = MyCallbacks [200, {}, []] else RESPONSE end end # The Rack DSL used to run the application run APP

Run the iodine server in single process mode: iodine -w 1 and the little timer is ticking.

Honestly, I don’t love the code I just wrote for the previous example. It’s a little long, it’s slightly iffy and we can’t use iodine’s cluster mode.

For my next example, I’ll author a chat room in 32 lines (including comments).

I will use Iodine’s pub/sub extension API to avoid the LiveList module and the timer thread. I don’t want a timer, so I’ll skip the Iodine.run_every method.

Also, I’ll limit the interaction to WebSocket clients. Why? to show I can.

This will better demonstrate the power offered by the new env['rack.upgrade'] approach and it will also work in cluster mode.

Sadly, this means that the example won’t run on Agoo for now.

# Place in config.ru RESPONSE = [200, { 'Content-Type' => 'text/html', 'Content-Length' => '12' }, [ 'Hello World!' ] ] CHAT = "chat".freeze # a Callback class class MyCallbacks def initialize env @name = env["PATH_INFO"][1..-1] @name = "unknown" if(@name.length == 0) end def on_open client client.subscribe CHAT client.publish CHAT, "#{@name} joined the chat." end def on_message client, data client.publish CHAT, "#{@name}: #{data}" end def on_close client client.publish CHAT, "#{@name} left the chat." end end # The actual Rack application APP = Proc.new do |env| if(env['rack.upgrade?'] == :websocket) env['rack.upgrade'] = MyCallbacks.new(env) [200, {}, []] else RESPONSE end end # The Rack DSL used to run the application run APP

Start the application from the command line (in terminal):

iodine

Now try (in the browser console):

ws = new WebSocket("ws://localhost:3000/Mitchel"); ws.onmessage = function(e) { console.log(e.data); }; ws.onclose = function(e) { console.log("Closed"); }; ws.onopen = function(e) { e.target.send("Yo!"); };

EDIT: Agoo 2.1.0 now implements pub/sub extensions, albeit, using slightly different semantics. I did my best so the same code would work on both servers.

Why didn’t anyone think of this sooner?

Actually, this isn’t a completely new idea.

Evens as the hijack API itself was suggested, an alternative approach was suggested.

Another proposal was attempted a few years ago.

But it seems things are finally going to change, as two high performance server, agoo and iodine already support this new approach.

Things look promising.

UPDATE: code examples were updated to reflect changes in theRack specification’s PR.