WebSockets vs Polling vs Queues: Choosing the Right Real-Time Primitive

Dec 202511 min readSarthak Srivastav

"Make it real-time" is a common PM request. But "real-time" isn't a single technology; it's a spectrum of trade-offs. Should you open a persistent WebSocket? Is Long Polling good enough? What about Server-Sent Events (SSE)?

1. Short Polling (The "Are We There Yet?" Approach)

The client asks the server every X seconds: "Any new data?"

  • Pros: Dead simple. Works on every server.
  • Cons: Wasteful. 99% of requests return "no change." High load on the database.

2. Long Polling

The client asks "Any data?", and the server hangs until data arrives (or timeouts).

  • Pros: Near real-time latency.
  • Cons: Still requires re-establishing connections constantly.

3. WebSockets (The Two-Way Highway)

A persistent, bidirectional TCP connection.

  • Pros: Lowest latency. True full-duplex (server can push, client can push).
  • Cons: Stateful. Scaling WebSockets is hard because you need "sticky sessions" or a Pub/Sub backplane (like Redis) to route messages across server instances.

4. Server-Sent Events (SSE)

Standard HTTP connection where the server streams data to the client.

  • Pros: Native browser support (EventSource). Auto-reconnection. Simple HTTP.
  • Cons: Unidirectional (Server -> Client only).

Decision Matrix

  • Chat App / Game: WebSockets. You need high-frequency, bidirectional state.
  • Stock Ticker / Sports Score: SSE. Use data flows one way.
  • Email Inbox: Long Polling (or just Short Polling). A 30s delay is acceptable.
  • Notification Feed: SSE or WebSockets depending on scale.

Conclusion

Don't reach for WebSockets by default. They introduce stateful complexity to your backend. If your data only flows one way (Server -> Client), SSE is drastically simpler and more firewall-friendly. Use the right tool for the right latency requirement.

Tags

Real-TimeWebSocketsSystem Design