The documentation says shared roster groups are based on pubsub. I want to allow users with similar interests to talk to each other. This is same as selecting a MUC and joining it. I have read that MUC doesnt scale well. Plus the issue with offline messages. Thus I was looking at create nodes and connecting users via nodes instead of MUC. Came across Shared groups , which is what I may be looking for. Just wanted to know from a scaling perspective, can a shared group handle 50K connected users? or would the outcome be same as using an MUC.
Looking for ejabberd docs?
To access the most up-to-date ejabberd documentation, please visit docs.ejabberd.im »
Shared roster group with 50K users? Is it better alternative to MUC?
Submitted by anavattva on Thu, 2014-08-28 05:13
The problem joining a room is
The problem joining a room is the same that becoming online in a shared group: you have 50.000 contacts (or room occupants), and the server sends an "online" presence packet to each one. Everytime you become "away" or "busy", another 50.000 packets are sent. And this happens for each one of the 50.000 contacts you have.