Performance Comparison and Evaluation of WebSocket Frameworks: Netty, Undertow, Vert.x, Grizzly and Jetty

Wang, Yukun; Huang, Lei; Liu, Xiaoyou; Sun, Tao; Lei, Kai

doi:10.1109/hoticn.2018.8605989

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…mPlane is another measurement platform that can be used for network measurements, and compositions at the edge [12] and requires a local node running the composition engine (Supervisor) on a competent machine connected via different types of APIs (TCP/IP, REST) to network probes, services, and clients. A similar concept is highlighted in [140], where the Vert.X toolkit is used to create and compose local microservices, with the ability to call remote atomic capabilities via different APIs such as Axios. Finally, the publication [13] highlights an example of edge/local composition using a composite engine (Fast IoT Composer) running on a local machine to compose smart home services.…”

Section: B) Edge/local Containers Implementationsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Vert.X [140] Message-driven toolkit for creating reactive, elastic, resilient, and responsive microservices…”

Section: Microsoftmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• A communications protocol capable of bidirectional communications over a single TCP connection (RFC 6455). [140] • Netty is compared with other WebSocket frameworks, including Undertow, Vert.X, Grizzly, and Jetty, to decide which situations each framework ought to be used for.…”

Section: Websocketmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…a) Communication roles: This role is manifested in i) enabling a wide variety of services such as microservices (Vert.X's Axios, [140]) and pub/sub Java federates (HLA [136], [118]) to communicate and exchange data with composition engines to build composite services, or in [211], where smart connected IoT devices leverage the mashup paradigm to communicate and exchange data, leading to value-added services through compositions in WSNs. ii) facilitating the communication of heterogeneous IoT networks through transparent access (CoAP/HTTP, [160]); iii) enabling the discoverability of IoT devices capabilities (mDNS, [21]); iv) simplifying interfaces and enabling flexible network management (SDN, [27] [41]); v) acting as middleware between publish-subscribe brokers and services (MQTT, [122] [147]); and vi) offering commands that enable requesting, receiving, composing, and storing data by leveraging multiple network components (mPlane protocol, [12]).…”

Section: ) Aq8: What Roles Do Communication Protocols Play In Composi...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

IoT Capabilities Composition and Decomposition: A Systematic Review

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As billions of IoT devices join the Internet, researchers and innovators increasingly explore IoT capabilities achieved via service composition or reuse of existing capabilities via service decomposition. Many systematic literature reviews (SLRs) were produced on this subject; however, two issues remain to be addressed: i) a reference taxonomy of the different aspects of IoT capabilities composition and decomposition is needed, and ii) many formal questions (e.g., standards role, formal representations applications, state-space explosion countermeasures, etc.), technical questions (e.g., composition process types and automation levels synergies, service decomposition categories, the role of AI/ML, etc.), and QoS questions (e.g., privacy, interoperability, and scalability challenges and solutions, etc.) remain unanswered. We introduce this work by discussing notions of IoT capabilities composition and decomposition in a layered IoT architecture while highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of existing SLRs. We identify unanswered questions through gaps in related work and motivate these questions using the PICOC methodology. We explain the search methodology and organize the topic questions using the proposed reference taxonomy. The identified research questions are answered, and trends and gaps that need additional attention from the research community are highlighted. This effort benefits city planners and end-users of IoT systems as it contributes to a better understanding of the role of composition and decomposition of IoT capabilities in building valueadded services or reusing existing ones for resource optimization. For researchers, this effort contributes a reference taxonomy for the topic and sheds light on important questions while highlighting corresponding trends and gaps requiring further attention.

show abstract

Section: B) Edge/local Containers Implementationsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Vert.X [140] Message-driven toolkit for creating reactive, elastic, resilient, and responsive microservices…”

Section: Microsoftmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Websocketmentioning

confidence: 99%