My UI designer is making me a rich html and java script front-end which is supposed to work with my Django server. I have provided him a bunch of APIs to get different elements from the server. (i.e. an api to load the images, another api to load some text, another api to load bigger size image when somebody clicked on a small one, etc.) The problem with this is that every time a user visits the page, I will be getting some number of requests.
On the other hand, I could have used django template tagging to render the page once with all the elements needed. however,
I was wondering if there is a clear benefit in one of these options?
As #limelights said, try not to optimise too early. Because you don't really know what will be your bottleneck.
And when you'll have problems, the first thing to check is your queries to the database. Do you use selectect_related() and are your indexes optimal for your requests. This include the queries that javascript make via django (Try to load all the child node needed in one or two requests, as select_related() do).
After that the next optimisation should probably be cache. Here's the doc about the django's cache framwork.
After that there's adanced optimisation with database denormalization, apache or nginx optimisation, mysql or postgresql settings optimisation, load balancing and etc... Those optimizationg should be done because you have a problem of popularity, not just for a few users.
Related
So I just created a website's front-end using ReactJS. Now all I need is a backend database that I will fetch data from using requests.
The question is whether I need to render templates using my backend or just use my server to make requests (eg get, post etc)
PS. I will be using Django as my backend.
Thank you everyone who will help me out.
Doing both is recommended. Based on the requirements and use cases we must use both ways to render.
For example, Some products use initial html as a Server side rendered page with all essential data required inserted as scripts and so on. This helps in loading primary content faster. If we are not following this in applications that require data initially. Then it might take more time to fetch React chunks, scripting and after seeing an API makes request, and then getting data and then displaying the primary content. So when a page needs more data (like More API calls) then server side rendering might be a good way.
For other scenarios like getting user details, All these can be done using React.
No, because you will use DRF (Django Rest Framework) to communicate between frontend and backend. Basically you will write your own APIs in the views.py that will respond with JSON data, at least in major of cases this will be enough. So, you don't need templates, since template are really Djangos' frontend, that you will not be using at all.
But, this heavily depends on what you are doing and what is your setup.
I am not able to comprehend what would be pros and cons of the following approaches in making a single page backbone application using RESTful APIs from Django Rest Framework.
Render the whole app from within Django's template.
Serve the backbone app from another server ie node server. With nginx in the front for both servers.
Serve the HTML/Templates and JS from a separate CDN.
What are the things to take care ie points of caution in each strategy. Is there any other way to tie them up which I am missing?
This is a very broad question, and really it has nothing to do with Django or Backbone. What you're really asking about is a "thick-client" architecture vs. a "thin-client" architecture. In other words, having your user interface rendered on the client vs. having it rendered on the server.
First, allow me to recap a few things to make sure we're on the same page. The "thin-client" approach is the traditional/old school model, and the model Django itself is based on. The server renders HTML, sends it to the client, and whenever the client wants to do something it sends data back to the server and asks for fresh HTML.
In contrast the more modern "thick-client" approach lets the client render all of the UI. Whenever the client needs to do something it makes an AJAX request to a (presumably REST-ful) API, powered by a library like Django REST Framework. That API just returns the relevant data, and leaves it up to the client to render it appropriately.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches, but the thick-client approach is becoming more and more popular because:
network transactions are faster: because your server is only sending the exact JSON you need instead of a mess of HTML, the "payload" of the response is much smaller
you can fetch all data "behind the scenes"; this makes things appear faster to the user, and lets you implement UI paradigms (eg. infinite scroll) that a thin client can't
the client/server relationship is simpler, because the people writing server code never have to even think about HTML or any other presentation logic; they get to just focus on the data (which, being server engineers, is probably the part they're most interested in anyway)
This is why a lot of companies (including the one I work for) have all but abandoned Django proper in favor of API endpoints served by Django REST Framework.
So, if you want to go with a thick client architecture, Django should never serve anything except the very first HTML page (and even that could be served by ngnix if you wanted, since it's just static HTML). After that you'd use a Backbone.Router and Backbone.Views to render your site. Whenever you need new information from the server you'd fetch a Backbone.Model or Backbone.Collection (with its url property pointing to your Django REST Framework endpoint).
I can attest that this whole approach works great; the site I work on is very complex, with many endpoints, and Backbone + Django REST Framework handles it beautifully. The only (slightly) tricky part is caching: in the thin client approach the browser automatically caches pages for you, but since there are no "pages" in a thick client (just AJAX responses with data) there is no automatic caching. This means that if you want to cache data you'll need to do it yourself, for instance with a Backbone.Collection devoted to that purpose.
Hope that helps.
P.S. Back in the day Django REST Framework didn't handle Django authentication stuff (ie. logging in/out) quite the way we wanted, so we wound up serving one other page, our login page, from Django. However I'm pretty sure the current Django REST Framework handles authentication stuff much better now, so this likely won't be an issue for you.
I've just been approached by my boss about the possibility of white labeling our Django-based site for a new, large customer. Basically, it sounds like it would mainly be changing the graphics/logos on the site. But, I'm sure that at some point they will want to start tweaking the business logic as well. I'm still unclear whether the desire is for it to be a subdomain (e.g. customer.mydomain.com) or a completely new custom domain. Ultimately, it will need to share the database with the rest of the system (for multiple reasons). Is this a good use of the Sites Framework in Django? Or is there a better way of doing this?
More info: Django 1.3.1; PostgreSQL 9.1; Hosted on Heroku
Use a combination of middleware (to set the active site) and context processors (to act on that). You could try to hook into contrib's site framework, but I've always outgrown it rather quickly.
I'm new to Django and I come from Drupal family. There we have Organic Groups with which we can create groups of content and subsites; how do I do something like that with Django?
Say I'm making this site for my company using Django and every department in my company needs a private section on the site. For example, the design people have their own part of the website into which the back-end developers can not come in. And the back-end developers will have the same thing too.
I want to build the site in such a way that I just login into Django admin and add a new category or subsite or group (whatever the Django term is) with the same settings from other groups or with similar settings.
It depends on what you mean by "private section". You should probably try looking at it from a different angle:
Django splits a site's functionality by means of "apps". Each app does its specific thing, and gets a set of tables in the database. Apps can access each others' tables. For example, it's common for other apps to access the Auth app's user, group, and permissions tables. Is this what you mean by "sub sites"?
As for access control, users can be assigned to groups and they can have various administrative permissions assigned to them. Add, change, and delete permissions are automatically generated for each model (i.e. database table). You can also add your own permissions.
I don't think you'll be able to separate the designers from the back-end developers at the Django level. You'll need to do something else, such as maintain separate source repositories for each and merge them to create the usable site (each group would have read-only access to the other). It really depends on your teams' discipline, because these elements can get intertwined.
Django recommends that static files be served by something else, say directly from your web server, or from another machine with a simple HTTP server (no CGI/WSGI/whatever). This is because Django can only slow down static files compared to direct service. However, for testing, ther is a static page server you can enable.
Given all that, static files usually amount to CSS, images, media, and JavaScript. Of these, the back-end people might want to mess with the JS, but that's it, so this could be in the designers' repo.
The Django tree itself has the code for the site and the apps. It's almost all back end stuff. The exception is the HTML template files, located in the "templates" directory in each app. These are the files that are filled in with the context data supplied by the back-end view code. I have no idea if this is front or back end for you guys; it could be mostly back end if there's a lot of CSS discipline, but I think that's unlikely.
There are a lot of things that you can do in Django that make life easier for one side or the other. For example, template tags allow custom Python code to generate HTML to insert into the page. I use these to generate tab bars and panes, for example.
I really can't help much more without getting a better picture of what your needs are. The question is still vague. You're probably best off taking a day or two going through the tutorial, seeing what the Django perspective is, and then working out how (or if!) it fits into your needs.
I'm looking at setting up a small company that hosts flash-based websites for artist portfolios. The customer control panel would be django-powered, and would provide the interface for uploading their images, managing galleries, selling prints, etc.
Seeing as the majority of traffic to the hosted sites would end up at their top level domain, this would result in only static media hits (the HTML page with the embedded flash movie), I could set up lighttpd or nginx to handle those requests, and pass the django stuff back to apache/mod_whatever.
Seems as if I could set this all up on one box, with the django sites framework keeping each site's admin separate.
I'm not much of a server admin. Are there any gotchas I'm not seeing?
Maybe. I don't think the built-in admin interface is really designed to corral admins into their own sites. The sites framework is more suited to publish the same content on multiple sites, not to constrain users to one site or another. You'd be better off writing your own admin interface that enforces those separations.
As far as serving content goes, it seems like you could serve up a common (static) Flash file that uses a dynamic XML file to fill in content. If you use Django to generate the XML, that would give you the dynamic content you need.
This django snippet might be what you need to keep them seperate:
http://www.djangosnippets.org/snippets/1054/
"A very simple multiple user blog model with an admin interface configured to only allow people to edit or delete entries that they have created themselves, unless they are a super user."
Depending on the amount of sites you're going to host it might be easier to write a single Django app once, with admin, and to create a separate Django project for each new site. This is simple, it works for sure AND as an added bonus you can add features to newer sites without running the risk of causing problems in older sites.
Then again, it might be handier to customize the admin such that you limit the amount of objects users can see to those on the given site itself. This is fairly easy to do, allthough you might want to use RequestSite instead of the usual Site from the sites framework as that requires separate settings for each site.
There exists this one method in the ModelAdmin which you can override to have manual control over the objects being edited.