Like 0
Fork 0

Last active 1756060287

MisterFixx revised this gist 1756060286. Go to revision

1 file changed, 72 insertions

chat.md(file created)

@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
1 + Great question — this design pattern (WebSocket for server → client, HTTP POST for client → server) is actually very common in real-time applications like Discord, Slack, etc., and it boils down to **security, reliability, and simplicity on the server side**.
2 +
3 + Here’s a breakdown of **why Discord uses HTTP POST for sending messages, but WebSocket for receiving them**:
4 +
5 + ---
6 +
7 + ### 🔁 WebSocket (Server → Client): Real-time Push
8 +
9 + Discord uses WebSockets to **push events to clients** (e.g., new messages, typing notifications, presence updates) because:
10 +
11 + * **Low latency, bidirectional, persistent connection**
12 + * **Efficient** for pushing lots of updates to thousands or millions of clients
13 + * **Maintains client session state**, so the server knows what the client is subscribed to
14 +
15 + ---
16 +
17 + ### 📤 HTTP POST (Client → Server): Sending Messages
18 +
19 + Users **send messages via HTTP POST** instead of WebSocket because:
20 +
21 + #### 1. **Authentication and Rate Limiting Are Easier**
22 +
23 + * HTTP allows for fine-grained **OAuth token verification**, **permissions checks**, and **IP-based rate limiting**.
24 + * Discord has **strict global and per-user rate limits** (e.g., 5 messages every 5 seconds in a channel) — these are easier to enforce with stateless HTTP requests.
25 +
26 + #### 2. **Statelessness is a Feature**
27 +
28 + * HTTP requests are **independent**, which is great for robustness. If your WebSocket connection is dropped, you can still send messages.
29 + * Easier to **retry failed sends** (e.g., if network drops) with a simple POST request.
30 +
31 + #### 3. **Infrastructure Simplicity**
32 +
33 + * HTTP is backed by **mature, scalable, battle-tested infrastructure** like CDNs, load balancers, reverse proxies, and API gateways.
34 + * WebSocket is more complex to scale on the server because it requires **stateful long-lived connections**.
35 +
36 + #### 4. **Auditing and Logging**
37 +
38 + * HTTP APIs are easier to **log, debug, and audit**.
39 + * REST endpoints can include payloads like message content, channel ID, nonce, attachments, etc., in a consistent, structured way.
40 +
41 + #### 5. **Compatibility**
42 +
43 + * HTTP is **universally supported**, even on limited clients or proxies that may block WebSockets or kill idle connections.
44 +
45 + ---
46 +
47 + ### 🧠 Why Not Just Use WebSockets for Everything?
48 +
49 + Technically, Discord **could** accept client messages over the WebSocket (the protocol allows for it), but:
50 +
51 + * The server would need to **track more client state**.
52 + * Malformed data would be harder to handle (less structured than an HTTP request).
53 + * Rate limits and abuse prevention would be harder.
54 + * Retry and reliability logic would have to be handled differently.
55 +
56 + By splitting the flow:
57 +
58 + * **WebSocket = real-time notifications from server**
59 + * **HTTP POST = user-generated actions to server**
60 +
61 + …it creates a **cleaner, more robust architecture**.
62 +
63 + ---
64 +
65 + ### TL;DR
66 +
67 + Discord uses:
68 +
69 + * **WebSockets for pushing data to clients** → real-time, efficient, and persistent.
70 + * **HTTP POST for sending messages to the server** → stateless, secure, easier to rate limit, audit, and scale.
71 +
72 + It’s a deliberate design tradeoff for performance and maintainability.
Newer Older

Powered by Opengist ⋅ Load: 16ms⋅

English