I have written a little streaming mp3 server in python. So far all it does is accept a ServerSocket connection, and begin streaming all mp3 data in its queue to the request using socket.send(). I have implemented this to chunk in stream icy metadata, so the name of the playing song shows up in the client.
I would like to add playlist management to the server, so that I can manipulate the playlist of the running server. I have a vague idea that xmlrpclib would be suited to doing this, but I'm confused about two things:
Whether it's possible/advisable to integrate ICY and XMLRPC on a single server and a single port.
How to share state between the stream thread and the playlist, and manipulation thereof via xmlrpc.
Your initial attempt might be easier if you use two separate ports, each with its own server running in a separate thread. However, managing synchronization between the threads might be an annoying task in the long run.
ICY and HTTP are very similar, and if you've already implemented ICY on top of SocketServer, you could probably extend BaseHTTPServer.BaseHTTPRequestHandler to respond to both ICY and HTTP requests on the same port. Take a look at the standard library code for the BaseHTTPRequestHandler.parse_request() method, and think about how to override it in a subclass for a split personality.
Also, when you want to handle multiple concurrent requests using these classes, take a look at the SocketServer mixin classes.
Related
I got a existing software project, that has a relatively primitive plugin system and wanted to expand it by providing a web interface.
Since my application processes realtime data, websockets are the only option besides web rtc.
My previous attempt used zeromq domain sockets on the python side and a server in Node js that connected to the domain socket.
This solution works great and has some benefits over the plugin server, but I want to offer a simpler option for folks that don't need the benefits and don't want the extra complexity.
How would you go about implementing this and is it even possible to do so?
Otherwise, I'll still do a separate process, but use fastapi to build the stuff around the socket endpoint and start it up using subprocess to spawn a second process that also connects to the domain socket.
Hope my question is not stupid, or a rtfm case.
I'm designing a system like this: a Python process (let's call it "server") accepts inputs from another process ("client", written in Objective-C) on the same machine and returns outputs to the client.
What's a good architecture for this system? I mean, what's a good protocol for server/client communication? I think making the server an HTTP service is overkill because the client always lives on the same machine.
I would argue it's not the HTTP that adds a lot of overhead, but the TCP 3-way connection handshake.
Having said that, a lot of systems use TCP for inter-process communication, so if you want to use HTTP, it's only a very small extra load on top.
Of course with HTTP, you are creating a new connection with each request, however this is not so bad - you should be able to make each HTTP call within 1 or 2ms.
With HTTP comes a lot of nice properties like not having to maintain a persistent TCP connection, a ton of great libraries to easily make/receive your requests, and the request/response model seems to suit your system needs.
I need to have a tcp socket client connected to a server to send data and receive.
But this socket must be always on and i cannot open another socket.
I have always some data to send over the time and then later process the answer to the data sent previously.
If i could open many sockets, i think it was more easy. But in my case i have to send everything on the same socket asynchronously.
So the question is, what do you recommend to use within the Python ecosystem? (twisted, tornado, etc)
Should i consider node.js or another option?
I highly recommend Twisted for this:
It comes with out-of-the-box support for many TCP protocols.
It is easy to maintain a single connection, there is a ReconnectingClientFactory that will deal with disconnections and use exponential backoff, and LoopingCall makes it easy to implement a heartbeat.
Stateful protocols are also easy to implement and intermingle with complex business logic.
It's fun.
I have a service that is exactly like the one you mention (single login, stays on all the time, processes data). It's been on for months working like a champ.
Twisted is possibly hard to get your head around, but the tutorials here are a great start. Knowing Twisted will get you far in the long run!
"i have to send everything on the same socket asynchronously"
Add your data to a queue, have a separate thread taking items out of the queue and sending via socket.send()
I am developing a testbed for cloud computing environment. I want to establish multiple client connection to a server. What I want is that, server first of all send a data to all the clients specifying sending_interval and then all the clients will keep on sending their data with a time gap of that time_interval (as specified by the server). Please help me out, how can I do the same using python socket program. (i.e. I want multiple client to single server connectivity and also client sending data with the time gap specified by server). Will be great-full if anyone can help me. Thanks in advance.
This problem is easily solved by the ZeroMQ socket library. It is production stable. It allows you to define publisher-subscriber relationships, where a publishing process will publish data on a port regardless of how many (0 to infinite) listening processes there are. They call this the PUB-SUB model; it's in their docs (link below).
It sounds like you want to set up a bunch of clients that are all publishers. They can subscribe to a controlling channel, which which will send updates to their configuration (how often to write). They also act as publishers, pushing out their own data at an interval specified by default/config channel/socket.
Then, you have one or more listening processes that listen to all the clients' published messages. Perhaps you could even have two listening processes, one for backup or DR, or whatever.
We're using ZeroMQ and loving the simplicity it gives; there's no connection errors because the publisher doesn't care if anyone is listening, and the subscriber can start before the publisher and if there's nothing there to listen to, it can just loop around and wait until there is.
Bindings are available in ALL languages (it's freaky). The Python binding isn't pure-python, it does require a C compiler, but is frighteningly fast, and the pub/sub example is a cut/paste, 'golly, it works!' experience.
Link: http://zeromq.org
There are MANY other methods available with this library, including message queues, etc. They have relatively complete documentation, too.
Multi-Client and Single server Socket programming can be achieved by Multithreading in Socket Programming. I have implemented both the method:
Single Client and Single Server
Multiclient and Single Server
In my GitHub Repo Link: https://github.com/shauryauppal/Socket-Programming-Python
What is Multi-threading Socket Programming?
Multithreading is a process of executing multiple threads simultaneously in a single process.
To understand well you can visit Link: https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/socket-programming-multi-threading-python/, written by me.
We have two Python programs running on two linux servers. Now we want to send messages between these Python programs. The best idea so far is to create a TCP/IP server and client architecture, but this seems like a very complicate way to do it. Is this really best practice for doing such a thing?
I like zeromq for simple messaging, it's really lightweight and fast...very flexible as well. Using AMQP messaging isn't a bad idea either depending on the specifics of your situation, I've found kombu to be a very nice pythonic library for that. You could also use xmlrpclib or setup a simple REST API with bottle or flask. Every option has it's place, so I'd investigate all your options.
This really depends on the kind of messaging you want and the roles of the two processes. If it's proper "client/server", I would probably create a SimpleHTTPServer and then use HTTP to communicate between the two. You can also use XMLRPCLib and the client to talk between them. Manually creating a TCP server with your own custom protocol sounds like a bad idea to me. You might also consider using a message queue system to communicate between them.
You could have a mulitprocessing.managers. As doc says :"A manager object controls a server process which manages shared objects. Other processes can access the shared objects by using proxies."
In your case, you could create a master process that control your other processes, each of those processes will call the master to grab the data.