re: Why SignalR does not use WebSockets?

Carla — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 01:22:40 GMT

The primary deefirfnce between this approach and an actual browser cache is best explained by comparing the words cache and storage . All kinds of Web stoage are managed in part based on a fixed size allocated per domain . Your browser's cache is managed for you: things are algorithmically optimized by expellig older, less used items. Local storage, on the other hand is just the storage part it contains no cache facilities. You can use a different name every time you change your css files, but even then nothing will expell your old entries unless you write something to manage that as well. In the process, you can very easily wind up wasting a valuable and finite resource. In most cases it is better to let the browser manage this on your behalf. One thing that can help a bit is to use a CDN (cloudflare offers a free one that I have had good experiences with) and, where possible promote sharing of these resouces across many domains as these will reduce latecy, load on your server and icrease your liklihood of cache hits for all.

Why SignalR does not use WebSockets Part II?

DamirDobric — Sat, 30 Mar 2013 13:28:05 GMT

If you notice that signalR does not use websockets you might first take a look on this post. But if this

Why SignalR does not use WebSockets Part II?

Damir Dobric Posts — Sat, 30 Mar 2013 13:22:40 GMT

If you notice that signalR does not use websockets you might first take a look on this post. But if this