Hi Ben,
technically, the overhead of an additional realms (on the same router worker) is quite small. couple of python objects.
performance wise I wouldnt expect much difference either because:
there is an internal URI map _per realm_ - however, this is a
O(log(n)) data structure (couple of prefix-trees
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radix_tree) where n is the number of
URIs in the realms (of procs or topics)
that being said, we have yet _tested_ scaling to this number of realms. we do want to support such numbers of realms definitely.
anyways. in your scenario (and without knowing more about the
scenario&app) I'd go with URIs:
com.example.myapp.<device ID>.myprocedure
and device ID just some integer or UUID or whatever.
you will then rely on authorization rules to split up access among the devices / users
---
what about users? I mean, are all 10k+ devices owned by a couple of different (or even just one) user, or is each dedicated to a specific user?
if the former, then realms allows you to have authentication on the respective realm as a first perimeter of defense - and then additionally authorization rules within the realm (after authentication).
hope above gives some clues,
Cheers,
/Tobias
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crossbar" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to crossbario+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cross...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crossbario/667c9755-7877-4698-a5e5-bd60b256a150%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.