Any benefit to multiple sockets between a server and a single client instance using Boost Beast? about beast HOT 4 CLOSED

The first thing to try is to do as much work as possible per I/O. That means, you want to transfer large buffers of data. Say, at least one megabyte per I/O call. If you have very many small buffers you should try to combine them into a single BufferSequence, or try copying them into a single, large destination buffer. You will need to measure these approaches.

Are you using HTTP, or Websocket?

from beast.

Awesome thank you! And just to help others reading this from our separate email thread, there is no benefit from opening multiple separate sockets on different ports between a client and server instance. It won't improve raw throughput.

I am using websocket as I think the upgraded protocol and ability to push data as it becomes available to the server from disk is most beneficial for this implementation.

If there is packet drop, does that delay the transmission to other clients or does the packet failure and TCP resend get a new spot in the the io_context run queue? As there will be many clients expecting imaging data from each containerized instance, ensuring all do not slow down due to one client's poor connection was another motivation for multiple sockets per client design.

from beast.

If there is packet drop, does that delay the transmission to other clients or does the packet failure and TCP resend get a new spot in the the io_context run queue? As there will be many clients expecting imaging data from each containerized instance, ensuring all do not slow down due to one client's poor connection was another motivation for multiple sockets per client design.

TCP packet retransmission (and other low-level tasks like sequence checking) is handled by the operating system's network stack, and they don't directly impact the application.

from beast.

Thank you

from beast.