推送通知退出率讲述了应用程序开发人员的清醒故事。

您是否知道60％的用户被禁用过于频繁或无关紧要的消息时禁用推送通知？

Push notification opt-out rates tell a sobering story for app developers. Did you know that 60% of users disable push notifications when bombarded with too frequent or irrelevant messages?

推送通知退出率讲述了应用程序开发人员的清醒故事。您是否知道60％的用户被禁用过于频繁或无关紧要的消息时禁用推送通知？

Despite being a critical component of mobile app engagement, most notification architectures don't deliver on their promise. The technology itself isn't new. Push notifications first appeared in 2009 for iOS and have since expanded across Apple iOS, Google Android, macOS, Windows, and major browsers.

尽管是移动应用程序参与度的关键组成部分，但大多数通知体系结构并未兑现他们的承诺。该技术本身并不新。推送通知最初是在2009年出现的iOS，此后一直在Apple iOS，Google Android，MacOS，Windows和主要浏览器中扩展。

What's striking, though, is how platform differences impact user behavior. Android users show approximately 91% opt-in rates compared to a mere 43% for iOS users. When done right, these notifications can boost conversion rates by up to 28% and improve daily active user retention by 20% through personalized messaging.

但是，令人惊讶的是平台差异如何影响用户行为。 Android用户的选择率约为91％，而iOS用户仅为43％。正确完成后，这些通知可以将转化率提高28％，并通过个性化消息将每日活跃的用户保留提高20％。

Building a notification system that works requires more than basic implementation. The architecture must handle massive message volumes without dropping communications – crucial for everything from chat applications to e-commerce platforms.

构建有效的通知系统所需的不仅仅是基本实施。该体系结构必须处理大量消息量，而不会丢弃通信 - 从聊天应用程序到电子商务平台的所有事物至关重要。

Many developers make the mistake of overlooking essential components like message queueing systems (RabbitMQ or Kafka) and proper analytics tracking. These oversights create architectures that collapse when scaled up.

许多开发人员犯了一个错误的错误，即忽略了消息排队系统（RabbitMQ或KAFKA）和适当的分析跟踪，例如消息排队系统。这些疏忽创造了缩放时崩溃的体系结构。

Throughout this article, we'll examine why most push notification systems break down and provide practical solutions to build resilient, scalable architectures that truly connect with your users. The difference between a good and great notification system often determines whether users engage with your app or ignore it completely.

在本文中，我们将研究为什么大多数推送通知系统都会崩溃并提供实用的解决方案，以构建具有弹性的可扩展体系结构，从而真正与用户联系。良好的通知系统和良好的通知系统之间的区别通常决定用户是与您的应用程序互动还是完全忽略它。

Why Most Push Notification Architectures Break at Scale

为什么大多数推送通知体系结构大规模破裂

Push notification systems fall apart at scale because developers build them for function rather than resilience. A setup that performs flawlessly with 1,000 users typically buckles when tasked with millions of daily messages. Real-world applications demand infrastructure capable of handling 100+ million registered devices with 5-10% active daily and processing 200,000+ messages per minute during peak events.

推动通知系统大规模崩溃，因为开发人员为功能而不是弹性构建它们。在每天数以百万计的每日消息任务时，该设置与1,000个用户无瑕，通常会带扣。现实世界中的应用程序要求能够处理100多个注册设备，每天有5-10％的活动，并且在高峰事件期间每分钟处理200,000多个消息。

Hardcoded Token Storage Without Expiry Checks

硬编码的令牌存储而无需过期检查

The foundation of most failing push architectures comes down to poor token management. Developers frequently store device tokens permanently without implementing any expiration logic. This approach works initially but creates serious problems as tokens become stale when users uninstall apps or switch devices.

大多数失败的推动体系结构的基础取决于代币管理差。开发人员经常在不实施任何有效期逻辑的情况下永久存储设备令牌。这种方法最初起作用，但会造成严重的问题，因为当用户卸载应用程序或交换设备时，令牌变得陈旧。

Firebase documentation confirms that any token inactive for over one month likely represents a dormant device. More concerning, after 270 days of inactivity, FCM marks tokens as expired and rejects any attempts to send to them. Without proper expiry checks, databases quickly accumulate thousands of invalid tokens, wasting server resources and distorting delivery metrics.

Firebase文档证实，一个超过一个月的任何代币无活动可能代表着一个休眠的设备。在不活动270天后，更多关于FCM的信息标记为已过期，并拒绝发送给它们的任何尝试。如果没有适当的到期检查，数据库很快就会积累数千个无效的令牌，浪费服务器资源和扭曲交付指标。

Effective token management requires:

有效的令牌管理需要：

Neglecting these practices invariably leads to wasted computing resources and significantly reduced delivery rates.

忽略这些做法总是会导致浪费计算资源，并大大降低交付率。

No Support for Multi-device Sync

不支持多设备同步

Today's users expect seamless experiences across multiple devices, yet many notification architectures ignore this reality. When users log in from different devices, poorly designed systems either fail to deliver messages to all endpoints or lose track of which notifications have been read.

当今的用户期望在多个设备上无缝体验，但是许多通知体系结构忽略了这一现实。当用户从不同的设备登录时，设计较差的系统要么无法向所有端点传递消息，要么丢失了已读取通知的跟踪。

The challenge grows more complex because each device requires its unique token. Developer forums highlight that marking notifications as read on one device rarely syncs this status to others. When users reinstall apps or restore from backups, tokens change completely, complicating the synchronization process.

挑战变得更加复杂，因为每个设备都需要其独特的令牌。开发人员论坛强调，标记一台设备上读取的通知很少会与其他状态同步。当用户重新安装应用程序或从备份中还原时，令牌会完全更改，从而使同步过程变得复杂。

Modern systems must associate multiple tokens with individual users while preserving their device-specific nature. They also need robust mechanisms to track notification status across all user devices, particularly when some endpoints might be offline during important updates.

现代系统必须将多个令牌与单个用户相关联，同时保留其特定于设备的性质。他们还需要强大的机制来跟踪所有用户设备上的通知状态，尤其是在重要更新期间某些端点可能会离线时。

Lack of Message Prioritization

缺乏消息优先级

Why should all notifications receive equal treatment? Many systems process time-sensitive alerts identically to general updates. Android's FCM clearly distinguishes between normal and high-priority messages, but developers frequently overlook this critical difference.

为什么所有通知都应该接受平等待遇？许多系统处理时间敏感的警报与一般更新相同。 Android的FCM清楚地区分了正常和高优先级信息，但是开发人员经常忽略这种关键差异。

High-priority messages attempt immediate delivery, even waking sleeping devices. Normal priority messages, however, may face delays during battery-saving Doze mode. Without proper prioritization, critical alerts like security warnings arrive alongside promotional messages, or worse, face significant delays.

高优先级消息尝试立即交付，甚至唤醒睡眠设备。但是，正常的优先消息可能会在节省电池的打击模式下面临延迟。如果没有适当的优先次序，就会与促销信息一起到达诸如安全警告之类的关键警报，或者更糟的是面临重大延迟。

Systems without prioritization mechanisms struggle particularly during high-volume events. During peak periods like Black Friday sales, notification infrastructure must handle thousands of messages per second. Without priority queues, essential transactional messages (such as order confirmations) get stuck behind marketing campaigns, severely degrading the user experience.

没有优先级机制的系统尤其是在大批量事件中挣扎。在黑色星期五销售等高峰期，通知基础设施必须每秒处理数千条消息。没有优先的队列，基本的交易消息（例如订单确认）会陷入营销活动后面，从而严重降低用户体验。

Building effective push notification architecture demands thoughtful design beyond basic functionality. For truly scalable systems, token management, multi-device synchronization, and sophisticated message prioritization aren't optional extras—they're fundamental requirements.

构建有效的推送通知体系结构要求超出基本功能的周到设计。对于真正可扩展的系统，代币管理，多设备同步和复杂的消息优先级不是可选的附加功能，而是他们的基本要求。

Understanding the Core Components of Push Notification Architecture

了解推送通知体系结构的核心组成部分

Push notifications might seem straightforward to end users, but behind that simple alert lies a complex web of services and protocols. Unlike email or SMS, these notifications travel through a sophisticated pathway involving three essential components working in concert. Let's examine how these pieces fit together to create a functioning notification system.

推送通知对于最终用户来说似乎很简单，但是在该简单的警报后面，通知是一个复杂的服务和协议网络。与电子邮件或SMS不同，这些通知穿越了一条复杂的途径，涉及三个基本组件在音乐会上进行。让我们研究这些部分如何融合在一起以创建功能性的通知系统。

Push Notification Services: APNs, FCM, WNS

推送通知服务：APN，FCM，WNS

The backbone of any notification system consists of platform-specific services acting as gatekeepers between your server and users' devices. Each major platform maintains its own distinct service:

任何通知系统的骨干都由特定于平台的服务组成，该服务充当您的服务器和用户设备之间的网守。每个主要平台都保持着自己独特的服务：

Apple Push Notification Service (APNs) handles all

Apple Push Notification Service（APNS）处理所有