mirror of
https://github.com/django/daphne.git
synced 2025-04-29 05:03:47 +03:00
301 lines
13 KiB
ReStructuredText
301 lines
13 KiB
ReStructuredText
Deploying
|
|
=========
|
|
|
|
Deploying applications using channels requires a few more steps than a normal
|
|
Django WSGI application, but you have a couple of options as to how to deploy
|
|
it and how much of your traffic you wish to route through the channel layers.
|
|
|
|
Firstly, remember that it's an entirely optional part of Django.
|
|
If you leave a project with the default settings (no ``CHANNEL_LAYERS``),
|
|
it'll just run and work like a normal WSGI app.
|
|
|
|
When you want to enable channels in production, you need to do three things:
|
|
|
|
* Set up a channel backend
|
|
* Run worker servers
|
|
* Run interface servers
|
|
|
|
You can set things up in one of two ways; either route all traffic through
|
|
a :ref:`HTTP/WebSocket interface server <asgi-alone>`, removing the need
|
|
to run a WSGI server at all; or, just route WebSockets and long-poll
|
|
HTTP connections to the interface server, and :ref:`leave other pages served
|
|
by a standard WSGI server <wsgi-with-asgi>`.
|
|
|
|
Routing all traffic through the interface server lets you have WebSockets and
|
|
long-polling coexist in the same URL tree with no configuration; if you split
|
|
the traffic up, you'll need to configure a webserver or layer 7 loadbalancer
|
|
in front of the two servers to route requests to the correct place based on
|
|
path or domain. Both methods are covered below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Setting up a channel backend
|
|
----------------------------
|
|
|
|
The first step is to set up a channel backend. If you followed the
|
|
:doc:`getting-started` guide, you will have ended up using the in-memory
|
|
backend, which is useful for ``runserver``, but as it only works inside the
|
|
same process, useless for actually running separate worker and interface
|
|
servers.
|
|
|
|
Instead, take a look at the list of :doc:`backends`, and choose one that
|
|
fits your requirements (additionally, you could use a third-party pluggable
|
|
backend or write your own - that page also explains the interface and rules
|
|
a backend has to follow).
|
|
|
|
Typically a channel backend will connect to one or more central servers that
|
|
serve as the communication layer - for example, the Redis backend connects
|
|
to a Redis server. All this goes into the ``CHANNEL_LAYERS`` setting;
|
|
here's an example for a remote Redis server::
|
|
|
|
CHANNEL_LAYERS = {
|
|
"default": {
|
|
"BACKEND": "asgi_redis.RedisChannelLayer",
|
|
"CONFIG": {
|
|
"hosts": [("redis-server-name", 6379)],
|
|
},
|
|
"ROUTING": "my_project.routing.channel_routing",
|
|
},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
To use the Redis backend you have to install it::
|
|
|
|
pip install -U asgi_redis
|
|
|
|
Some backends, though, don't require an extra server, like the IPC backend,
|
|
which works between processes on the same machine but not over the network
|
|
(it's available in the ``asgi_ipc`` package)::
|
|
|
|
CHANNEL_LAYERS = {
|
|
"default": {
|
|
"BACKEND": "asgi_ipc.IPCChannelLayer",
|
|
"ROUTING": "my_project.routing.channel_routing",
|
|
"CONFIG": {
|
|
"prefix": "mysite",
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
Make sure the same settings file is used across all your workers and interface
|
|
servers; without it, they won't be able to talk to each other and things
|
|
will just fail to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run worker servers
|
|
------------------
|
|
|
|
Because the work of running consumers is decoupled from the work of talking
|
|
to HTTP, WebSocket and other client connections, you need to run a cluster
|
|
of "worker servers" to do all the processing.
|
|
|
|
Each server is single-threaded, so it's recommended you run around one or two per
|
|
core on each machine; it's safe to run as many concurrent workers on the same
|
|
machine as you like, as they don't open any ports (all they do is talk to
|
|
the channel backend).
|
|
|
|
To run a worker server, just run::
|
|
|
|
python manage.py runworker
|
|
|
|
Make sure you run this inside an init system or a program like supervisord that
|
|
can take care of restarting the process when it exits; the worker server has
|
|
no retry-on-exit logic, though it will absorb tracebacks from inside consumers
|
|
and forward them to stderr.
|
|
|
|
Make sure you keep an eye on how busy your workers are; if they get overloaded,
|
|
requests will take longer and longer to return as the messages queue up
|
|
(until the expiry or capacity limit is reached, at which point HTTP connections will
|
|
start dropping).
|
|
|
|
In a more complex project, you won't want all your channels being served by the
|
|
same workers, especially if you have long-running tasks (if you serve them from
|
|
the same workers as HTTP requests, there's a chance long-running tasks could
|
|
block up all the workers and delay responding to HTTP requests).
|
|
|
|
To manage this, it's possible to tell workers to either limit themselves to
|
|
just certain channel names or ignore specific channels using the
|
|
``--only-channels`` and ``--exclude-channels`` options. Here's an example
|
|
of configuring a worker to only serve HTTP and WebSocket requests::
|
|
|
|
python manage.py runworker --only-channels=http.* --only-channels=websocket.*
|
|
|
|
Or telling a worker to ignore all messages on the "thumbnail" channel::
|
|
|
|
python manage.py runworker --exclude-channels=thumbnail
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run interface servers
|
|
---------------------
|
|
|
|
The final piece of the puzzle is the "interface servers", the processes that
|
|
do the work of taking incoming requests and loading them into the channels
|
|
system.
|
|
|
|
If you want to support WebSockets, long-poll HTTP requests and other Channels
|
|
features, you'll need to run a native ASGI interface server, as the WSGI
|
|
specification has no support for running these kinds of requests concurrently.
|
|
We ship with an interface server that we recommend you use called
|
|
`Daphne <http://github.com/django/daphne/>`_; it supports WebSockets,
|
|
long-poll HTTP requests, HTTP/2 *(soon)* and performs quite well.
|
|
|
|
You can just keep running your Django code as a WSGI app if you like, behind
|
|
something like uwsgi or gunicorn; this won't let you support WebSockets, though,
|
|
so you'll need to run a separate interface server to terminate those connections
|
|
and configure routing in front of your interface and WSGI servers to route
|
|
requests appropriately.
|
|
|
|
If you use Daphne for all traffic, it auto-negotiates between HTTP and WebSocket,
|
|
so there's no need to have your WebSockets on a separate port or path (and
|
|
they'll be able to share cookies with your normal view code, which isn't
|
|
possible if you separate by domain rather than path).
|
|
|
|
To run Daphne, it just needs to be supplied with a channel backend, in much
|
|
the same way a WSGI server needs to be given an application.
|
|
First, make sure your project has an ``asgi.py`` file that looks like this
|
|
(it should live next to ``wsgi.py``)::
|
|
|
|
import os
|
|
from channels.asgi import get_channel_layer
|
|
|
|
os.environ.setdefault("DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE", "my_project.settings")
|
|
|
|
channel_layer = get_channel_layer()
|
|
|
|
Then, you can run Daphne and supply the channel layer as the argument::
|
|
|
|
daphne my_project.asgi:channel_layer
|
|
|
|
Like ``runworker``, you should place this inside an init system or something
|
|
like supervisord to ensure it is re-run if it exits unexpectedly.
|
|
|
|
If you only run Daphne and no workers, all of your page requests will seem to
|
|
hang forever; that's because Daphne doesn't have any worker servers to handle
|
|
the request and it's waiting for one to appear (while ``runserver`` also uses
|
|
Daphne, it launches worker threads along with it in the same process). In this
|
|
scenario, it will eventually time out and give you a 503 error after 2 minutes;
|
|
you can configure how long it waits with the ``--http-timeout`` command line
|
|
argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deploying new versions of code
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
One of the benefits of decoupling the client connection handling from work
|
|
processing is that it means you can run new code without dropping client
|
|
connections; this is especially useful for WebSockets.
|
|
|
|
Just restart your workers when you have new code (by default, if you send
|
|
them SIGTERM they'll cleanly exit and finish running any in-process
|
|
consumers), and any queued messages or new connections will go to the new
|
|
workers. As long as the new code is session-compatible, you can even do staged
|
|
rollouts to make sure workers on new code aren't experiencing high error rates.
|
|
|
|
There's no need to restart the WSGI or WebSocket interface servers unless
|
|
you've upgraded the interface server itself or changed the ``CHANNEL_LAYER``
|
|
setting; none of your code is used by them, and all middleware and code that can
|
|
customize requests is run on the consumers.
|
|
|
|
You can even use different Python versions for the interface servers and the
|
|
workers; the ASGI protocol that channel layers communicate over
|
|
is designed to be portable across all Python versions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _asgi-alone:
|
|
|
|
Running just ASGI
|
|
-----------------
|
|
|
|
If you are just running Daphne to serve all traffic, then the configuration
|
|
above is enough where you can just expose it to the Internet and it'll serve
|
|
whatever kind of request comes in; for a small site, just the one Daphne
|
|
instance and four or five workers is likely enough.
|
|
|
|
However, larger sites will need to deploy things at a slightly larger scale,
|
|
and how you scale things up is different from WSGI; see :ref:`scaling-up`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _wsgi-with-asgi:
|
|
|
|
Running ASGI alongside WSGI
|
|
---------------------------
|
|
|
|
ASGI and its canonical interface server Daphne are both relatively new,
|
|
and so you may not wish to run all your traffic through it yet (or you may
|
|
be using specialized features of your existing WSGI server).
|
|
|
|
If that's the case, that's fine; you can run Daphne and a WSGI server alongside
|
|
each other, and only have Daphne serve the requests you need it to (usually
|
|
WebSocket and long-poll HTTP requests, as these do not fit into the WSGI model).
|
|
|
|
To do this, just set up your Daphne to serve as we discussed above, and then
|
|
configure your load-balancer or front HTTP server process to dispatch requests
|
|
to the correct server - based on either path, domain, or if
|
|
you can, the Upgrade header.
|
|
|
|
Dispatching based on path or domain means you'll need to design your WebSocket
|
|
URLs carefully so you can always tell how to route them at the load-balancer
|
|
level; the ideal thing is to be able to look for the ``Upgrade: WebSocket``
|
|
header and distinguish connections by this, but not all software supports this
|
|
and it doesn't help route long-poll HTTP connections at all.
|
|
|
|
You could also invert this model, and have all connections go to Daphne by
|
|
default and selectively route some back to the WSGI server, if you have
|
|
particular URLs or domains you want to use that server on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Running on a PaaS
|
|
-----------------
|
|
|
|
To run Django with channels enabled on a Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS), you will
|
|
need to ensure that your PaaS allows you to run multiple processes at different
|
|
scaling levels; one group will be running Daphne, as a pure Python application
|
|
(not a WSGI application), and the other should be running ``runworker``.
|
|
|
|
The PaaS will also either have to provide either its own Redis service or
|
|
a third process type that lets you run Redis yourself to use the cross-network
|
|
channel backend; both interface and worker processes need to be able to see
|
|
Redis, but not each other.
|
|
|
|
If you are only allowed one running process type, it's possible you could
|
|
combine both interface server and worker into one process using threading
|
|
and the in-memory backend; however, this is not recommended for production
|
|
use as you cannot scale up past a single node without groups failing to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _scaling-up:
|
|
|
|
Scaling Up
|
|
----------
|
|
|
|
Scaling up a deployment containing channels (and thus running ASGI) is a little
|
|
different to scaling a WSGI deployment.
|
|
|
|
The fundamental difference is that the group mechanic requires all servers serving
|
|
the same site to be able to see each other; if you separate the site up and run
|
|
it in a few, large clusters, messages to groups will only deliver to WebSockets
|
|
connected to the same cluster. For some site designs this will be fine, and if
|
|
you think you can live with this and design around it (which means never
|
|
designing anything around global notifications or events), this may be a good
|
|
way to go.
|
|
|
|
For most projects, you'll need to run a single channel layer at scale in order
|
|
to achieve proper group delivery. Different backends will scale up differently,
|
|
but the Redis backend can use multiple Redis servers and spread the load
|
|
across them using sharding based on consistent hashing.
|
|
|
|
The key to a channel layer knowing how to scale a channel's delivery is if it
|
|
contains the ``!`` character or not, which signifies a single-reader channel.
|
|
Single-reader channels are only ever connected to by a single process, and so
|
|
in the Redis case are stored on a single, predictable shard. Other channels
|
|
are assumed to have many workers trying to read them, and so messages for
|
|
these can be evenly divided across all shards.
|
|
|
|
Django channels are still relatively new, and so it's likely that we don't yet
|
|
know the full story about how to scale things up; we run large load tests to
|
|
try and refine and improve large-project scaling, but it's no substitute for
|
|
actual traffic. If you're running channels at scale, you're encouraged to
|
|
send feedback to the Django team and work with us to hone the design and
|
|
performance of the channel layer backends, or you're free to make your own;
|
|
the ASGI specification is comprehensive and comes with a conformance test
|
|
suite, which should aid in any modification of existing backends or development
|
|
of new ones.
|