Websockets vs. iOS Push Notifications

Question

Take an iOS app like Instagram. Instagram is fundementally a real-time application that updates its UI whenever a user interacts with you. For example, if someone likes your post and you are using the app, the UI is updated to trigger dopamine release and inform you that something has hapened to one of your posts. Similarly, when someone sends you a direct message on instagram, while using the app, you see the message spring down from the top, all in real-time.

In terms of implementing such real time features it is obvious that a naive HTTPS polling approach is far too inefficient. Thus this leaves two strategies:

1.) APNS Push Notifications:

When a user likes a post, sends a direct message, comments (etc.), send an HTTP POST to a backend server that will then update the database and send a silent Apple push-notification to the device of the recipient. The recipient, which is using the app, will receive the pushed payload and will send an HTTP GET to the backend server to fetch the needed data (ie. the contents of the direct message sent). The UI is updated in quasi "real-time".

2.) Websockets:

Whenever any user opens the iOS app, connect the user to the server via a websocket. This means, that all users currently using the app are connected to the server via their own websocket. When a user likes a post, sends a direct message, comments (etc.), the app sends a message to the server through the socket indicating the action. The server, before updating the database, finds the socket associated with the recipient and forwards the message through the socket to the recipient. Upon reception of the message, the UI is updated in real-time

Which of these approaches is scalable and better suited for a production environment?

Nigel

Answer 1

TL;DR You'll love websockets + Combine framework, event driven to update your UI smoothly. APNS can be somewhat unreliable in terms of deliverability and resource/database costs, and to me is more of an information center.

Reasons to like websockets:

• Decreases DB costs (e.g. finding device to send to)
• You know when the user is not using the app, decreasing outbound data costs
• Latency and faster practically speaking (more in depth in the websocket paragraph)

To answer the question: websockets are scalable based on your user count obviously. APNS is not server side testable in the CI, not cross platform, and not exactly feasible in terms of resource consumption.

---

I have a bias with websockets. But to present why I like it more, think about the efficiency given by your Instagram example.

To me, websockets == Event Driven, APNS is a simple information center.

APNS:

You sign up with APNS and you save the device in your backend. Great, every time an action is performed, like someone liking your post, query your backend, find the device that is linked to the OP, then send it outbound (which costs money if you think cloud computing costs). And you have to do that every single time someone likes your post (obviously you can aggregate, but why bother when you have websockets?). So database costs is one thing to think about. Additionally, a user could be muting their notifications. I don't have Instagram, but something efficiency wise they could have done (if not by sockets) is updating their UI based on incoming notifications for likes/hearts rather than a websocket connection. That's slow in terms of latency, costly, and unreliable if marked as spam. However, APNS has the benefit of not needing authorization unlike websockets, but...

Websockets:

When we approach websockets, you only authorize once (at least for mobile applications). You're removing outbound data costs (in terms of $$ and latency) by removing stuff like headers. You want to send small chunks of data, and sockets are just sending text/binary (I like to create commands out of them using JSON. A notable example is GitHub). When your user is done with the app, you close the connection and you don't need to send anymore data via APNS. Your server itself can be communicating with a single websocket via something like Redis PubSub in order to update your UI when someone uses a POST request to heart a post without needing to send some push notification. That's a win for the liker (who doesn't need to wait for that push notification to be sent) or the other way if you offload it to a background task (the OP doesn't need to wait). Websockets == Event Driven:

• Small data chunks that are constantly delivered (as in a lot) is much better than having APNS in which it can be slow to actually deliver, especially if you're flooding Apple/your user with notifications, marking you as spam. Although, disclaimer, that's just my personal belief and speculation depending on your use case.
• You're removing those unnecessary database costs.
• A downside would be keeping the connection alive.

---

Personally, I've used websockets with the combine framework recently for a chat application, but it can be used in so many different circumstances. Updating a Facebook feed/comment section, live notifications via the websocket instead of APNS, even posting content.

Vernievernier

Answer 2

APNS is not guaranteed to be delivered, especially if you have a lot of notifications - I don't remember where I read that, but after some threshold per min it'll stop working. Also, you'll have to send them to all your users, not just online ones. It's possible to send silent notifications, but it's still not optimal.

That's why websocket is a preferred way. Also you can use something like https://github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo, which is a helper for your server, that'll hold all the connections, and is very stable.

Vault

Answer 3

It is not one out of two, even the web-socket isn't failsafe, but all of above should be considered for an effective communication, when the app is in foreground use a web-socket to listen for any updates from the server, expect a confirmation from client when something is delivered by socket, if the web-socket connection is not active or the there is no confirmation response deliver the update through APNS/FCM, as APNS/FCM it is not guaranteed to deliver, deliver the updates when next Socket connection is successful.

Demetriusdemeyer