Here's my scenario. I am writing a web app for a client that needs to be portable, i.e. they need to plug it into different PCs (Windows) and have it simply work. Life would have been easier if they could just put it up on a domain, but no can do in this case, cause internet access might not always be available. So, I am trying out Railo Express with Jetty (http://www.getrailo.org/index.cfm/download/) which has everything I need. I actually managed to install (well, copy and configure really) the package on a USB stick, created a new site in the "/webapps" folder and wired that up, then downloaded the drivers for SQLITE and got that connected and working just fine.
This is not going to be a very intense web app at all, or does it need many users connected to it (max 2-3 at a time). I use Bootstrap and other than a Dashboard with a couple of graphs, all the pages are basically forms and read/write to the SQLITE db.
So, while everything seems to work do you think this is a viable solution? It seems to work fine, but will I run into any issues, like perhaps performance or compatibility issues with the different PCs the client might be using? And is there a better way of doing this?
EDIT:
Thanks for replying guys. Here's some more info to hopefully clear things out. I should have been more specific as to why use a portable web app. The app is for a car wash business to log the business going through. There is basically one computer at the counter where things will be accessed from (and the USB will be attached here), and possibly one iPod at the entrance where cars going in will be logged by the attendant (and will connect to the local computer via wireless). The reason for portability? They want to take the stick home with them and review stats, so it's either a full installation on the computer and a backup on the stick (extra work), or just everything on the stick. The reason for not simply going online and making things easier for everyone: tricky internet reception, which would mean downtime of the app.
From your descriptions it looks like a simple and not very intensive application. Based on my experience with Railo Express, I think you have the power needed to run this.
What I would do is to install the application on the computer at the counter since that is the main hub (you mention the iPad connecting wireless). Use the stick as a backup and before they take it home, make sure the stick is updated with data. You might also consider designed the app so that there is separation between writing data and consuming it (e.g. people at home running reports).
Will the app on the stick run at home, most likely it will work, or if you run into some problems will not be hard to fix.
Please excuse the noobiness of my question. I am mostly searching here for some directions and buzzwords to start digging from.
I spent some time developing an application in Python
Basically, it takes a bunch of images and creates a video out of it.
It i quite simple, and uses only a few libraries (opencv and nunmpy mostly).
I designed a small gui in gtk, but I think that it would be a good idea to offer the service over the web.
I think I could reuse some of my core and design a front end that people could access in their browser.
I only need a few data to get it running (images, an email)
The thing is my web dev skills are really close to 0, and I don't exactly know where to start from .
I don't plan on having hundreds of people a day on the platform.
People would connect, feed me with the data (link to a dropbox folder, google drive, whatever) and I would send them a message where it's finished.
If you could provide me with some names or links so that I could touch the field, I'd be really glad.
CGI is a fine option, but if you already have Python experience Django is definitely worth checking out (it falls in the category of rhooligan's #3 except it uses Python!). Django completely takes care of all of the database backend details for you, which is a benefit over simple CGI. It also provides easy-to-use pre-defined classes for handling file uploads, images, etc. It also has a great tutorial that will get you up and running. Just be careful about whether you're using version 1.3, 1.4, or the latest dev version, because some aspects of the framework have changed fairly quickly. Make sure that you're always looking at the right version of the docs.
Another handy service to keep in mind for doing something like image processing through a web app is a hosted cloud computing service provider like PiCloud. Unless you already have a private web server with lots of memory and processing power, these cloud services that charge by the ms are really cool. They also give you 1000s of cores which could allow you to do lot's of concurrent processing. They provide a nice Python API, and it has numpy and opencv pre-installed in both v2.6 and v2.7. (They use PyOpenCV, but you also have root access to install anything you want, so you can set up the "cv2" interface if that's what you're using--actually I just looked at your GitHub and it looks like you're using the old "cv" interface. You can also install any application you want on PiCloud--it doesn't have to be Python.)
You could start by looking into the Python CGI module and see if it will work for you. Then you'll need to do the following steps:
Decide on a webserver and install it, Apache is probably a good starting point.
Design the UI. Wireframe things out on paper paper. Figure out how you'd ideally want the users to go through your site and what you want on each page/view.
Your decision in #2 drives all the decisions from this point out. These days, most web applications are a combination of Web 1.0 and JSON/REST "services" (there's a couple of buzzwords for ya!). JQuery is a popular and widely used JavaScript library for developing the front end of your site. That would be another thing to look at. JQuery is completely independent from the back end and can be used with any type of back end (PHP, Ruby, Perl, .NET, etc)
I've been looking at Rietveld as a solution for the lack of code reviews at my company. Can it be set up on a server in-house without using App Engine? It seems to have a bit of App Engine specific code, and I'm not sure it could be set up on a plain old Django/Apache install. I've looked around, but haven't found any information about this.
Check out http://django-gae2django.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/examples/rietveld/README
The gae2django project lets GAE apps run against django instead of the GAE development environment.
That means you can run rietveld under django directly, using (by default) an SQLite backend. You can also use mysql or any other DB backend django supports.
That, plus a web server (e.g. Apache) with WSGI integration, makes a local rietveld install run nicely.
What about using one of these projects that provide the same backend services as GAE?
Typhoon AE
Appscale
There may be more, these are just the ones I know about off the top of my head.
A bit of App Engine specific code? It's supposed to be an example App Engine app, so yeah it's pretty well tied to it. But, you're right, it does use Django which could make it somewhat more feasible to port. I'll second #cope360 recommendation, but from the sounds of your question, it doesn't sound like you've done much with App Engine. If it's only used by a few people, try running it on the GAE SDK itself.
Beyond that, I'd think you could take most of the code in the "codereview" directory and build you're own Django/apache app from that.
Rather than fussing around with a port or other GAE emulation, I would consider using ReviewBoard.
Review Board is a powerful web-based
code review tool that offers
developers an easy way to handle code
reviews. It scales well from small
projects to large companies and offers
a variety of tools to take much of the
stress and time out of the code review
process.
For too long, code reviews have been
too much of a chore. This is largely
due to the lack of quality tools
available, leaving developers to
resort to e-mail and bug tracker-based
solutions.
We've seen a lot of time and energy
wasted doing code reviews both in open
source projects and at companies. In
both cases, code reviews were
typically done over e-mail. A
significant amount of time was spent
in forming review requests, switching
between the diff and the e-mail, and
trying to understand what parts of the
code the reviewer was referring to.
So in an effort to keep our sanity and
improve the process both in our open
source projects and at companies, we
wrote Review Board. We hope it will be
useful to your team too so you can
focus on what's important: writing
great products.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
We are finishing up our web application and planning for deployment. Very important aspect of deployment to production is monitoring the health of the system. Having a small team of developers/support makes it very critical for us to get the early notifications of potential problems and resolve them before they have impact on users.
Using Nagios seams like a good option, but wanted to get more opinions on what are the best monitoring tools/practices for web application in general and specifically for Django app? Also would welcome recommendations on what should be monitored aside from the obvious CPU, memory, disk space, database connectivity.
Our web app is written in Django, we are running on Linux (Ubuntu) under Apache + Fast CGI with PostgreSQL database.
EDIT
We have a completely virtualized environment under Linode.
EDIT
We are using django-logging so we have a way separate info, errors, critical issues, etc.
Nagios is good, it's good to maybe have system testing (Selenium) running regularily.
Edit: Hyperic and Groundwork also look interesting.
There is probably a test suite system that can keep pressure testing everything as well for you. I can't remember the name off the top of my head, maybe someone can mention one below.
Other things I like to do:
The best motto for infrastructure is always fix, detect, repair. Get it up, get to the root of it, and cure/prevent it if you can.
Since a system exists at many levels, we should test at many levels:
Edit: Have all errors or warnings posted directly to your case manager via email. That way you can track occurrences in one place.
1) Connection : monitor your internet connectivity from the server and from the outside. Log this somewhere
2) Server : monitor all the processes that you need to to ensure they are running and not pinning the server. Use a HP Server or something equivalent with hardware failure notification that it can do from a bios level. Notify and log if they are.
3) Software : Identify the key software that always needs to be running. Set the performance levels if any and then monitor them. Nagios should be able to help with this. On windows it can be a bit more. When an exception occurs, you should be able to run a script from it to restart processes automatically. My dream system is allowing me to interact with servers via SMS if the server sees it as an exception that I have to either permit, or one that will happen automatically unless I cancel by sms. One day..
4) Remote Power : Ensure Remote power-reset capabilities are in your hand. You might want to schedule weekly reboots if you ever use windows for anything.
5) Business Logic Testing : Have regularly running scripts testing the workflow of your system. Selenium can probably achieve some of this, but I like logging the results as well to say this ran at this time and these files had errors. If possible anywhere, have the system monitor itself through your scripts.
6) Backups : Make a backup that you can set and forget. If you can get things into virtual machines it would be ideal as you can scale, move, or deploy any part of your infrastructure anywhere. I have had instances where I moved a dead server onto my laptop, let it run in vmware while I fixed a problem.
Monitoring the number of connections to your Web server and your database is another good thing to track. Chances are if one shoots through the roof, something is starving for resources and the site is about to go down.
Also make sure you have a regular request for a URL that is a reasonable end-to-end test of the system. If your site supports search, then have nagios execute a search - that should make sure the search index is healthy, the Web server and the database server.
Also, make sure that your applications sends you email anytime your users see an error, or there is an unhandled exception. That way you know how the application is failing in the field.
If I had to pick one type of testing it would be to test the end-user functionality of the system. The important thing to consider is the user. While testing things like database availability, server up-time, etc, are all important, testing work-flows through your system via a remote UI testing system covers all these bases. If you know that the critical parts of your system are available to the end-user, then you know your system is prolly Ok.
Identify the important work-flows in your system. For example, if you wrote an eCommerce site you might identify a work-flow of "search for a product, put product in shopping cart, and purchase product".
Prioritize the work-flows, and build out higher-priority tests first. You can always add additional tests after you roll out to production.
Build UI tests using one of the available UI testing frameworks. There are a number of free and commercial UI testing frameworks that can be run in an automated fashion. Build a core set of tests first that address critical work-flows.
Setup at least one remote location from which to run tests. You want to test every aspect of your system, which means testing it remotely. Is the internet connection up? Is the web server running? Is the connection to the database server working? Etc, etc. If you test remotely you make sure you system is available to the outside world which means it is most likely working end-to-end. You can also run these tests internally, but I think it is critical to run them externally.
Make sure your solution includes both reporting and notification. If one of your critical work-flow tests fails, you want someone to know about it to fix the problem ASAP. If a non-critical task fails, perhaps you only want reporting so that you can fix problems out-of-band.
This end-user testing should not eliminate monitoring of system in your data-center, but I want to reiterate that end-user testing is the most important type of testing you can do for a web application.
Ahhh, monitoring. How I love thee and your vibrations at 3am.
Essentially, you need a way to inspect the internal state of your application, both at a specific moment, as well as over spans of time (the latter is very important for detecting problems before they occur). Another way to think of it is as glorified unit-testing.
We have our own (very nice) monitoring system, so I can't comment on Nagios or other apps. Our use case is similar to yours, though (cgi app on apache).
Add a logging.monitor() type method, which will log information to disk. This should support, at the least, logging simple numbers and dicts of numbers (the key=>value association can be incredibly handy).
Have a process that scrapes the monitoring logs and stores them into a database.
Have a process that takes the database information, checks them against rules, and sends out alerts. Keep in mind that somethings can be flaky. Just because you got a 404 once doesn't mean the app it down.
Have a way to mute alerts (very useful for maintenance or to read your email).
Thats all pretty high level. The important thing is that you have a history of the state of the application over time. From this, you can then create rules (perhaps just raw sql queries you put into a config somewhere), that say "If the queries per second doubled, send a SlashDotted alert", or "if 50% of responses are 404, send an alert". It also bedazzles management because you can quantify any comment about whether its up, down, fast, or slow.
Things to monitor include (others probably mentioned these as well): http status, port accessible, http load, database load, open connection, query latency, server accessibility (ssh, ping), queries per second, number of worker processes, error percentage, error rate.
Simple end-to-end tests are also very handy, though they can be brittle. Its best to keep them simple, but you should have one that tries to touch core pieces of the app (caching, database, authentication).
I use Munin and Monit, and have been very happy with both of them.
Internal logging is fine and dandy but when your whole app goes down or your box/enviro crashes you need an outside check too. http://www.pingdom.com/ has been very reliable for me.
My only other advice is I wouldnt spent too much time on this. my best example is twitter, how much energy did they put into the system being able to half-die instead of just investing that time and energy into throwing more hardware / scaling it out.
Chances are what ends up taking you down, your logging and health systems will have missed anyway.
The single most important way to monitor any online site is to monitor externally. The goal should be to monitor your site in a way that most closely reflects how your users use the site. In 99% of cases, as soon as you know that your site is down externally, it's relatively easy to find the root cause. The most important thing is to know as soon as possible that your customers are unable to load your site.
This generally means using an external performance monitoring service. They very from the very low end (mon.itor.us, pingdom) to the high end (Webmetrics, Gomez, Keynote). And as always, you get what you pay for. The things to look for when shopping around for a monitoring service include:
The size and distribution of the monitoring network
Whether or not the monitoring solution is able to monitor your site using a real browser (otherwise you aren't testing your site like a real user would)
The scripting language (to script the transactions against your site)
The support department, to help you along the way, and provide expertise on how to monitor correctly
Good luck!
Web monitoring by IP Patrol or SiteSentry have been useful for us. The second is a bit like site confidence but slightly prettier lol.
Have you thought about monitoring the functionality as well? A script (either in a scripting language like Perl or Pyton or using some tool like WebTest) that talks to your application and does some important steps like logging in, making a purchase, etc is very nice to have.
Aside from what to monitor, which has already been answered, you need to make sure - whatever system you use - that you get only one notification of an error that happens multiple times, on each request. Or your inbox will run out of memory :) Plus, it's plain annoying...
Divide the standby shifts among the support/dev team, so one person does not have to be on call every single evening. That will wear people down. Monitoring is a good thing, but everyone needs to get a chance to have a life once in a while. Your cellphone buzzing at 2AM for a few nights will get very old pretty soon, trust me. And not every developer is used to 24/7 support, so you need to find the balance between using monitoring and abusing monitoring.
Basically, have distinct escalation levels, and if the sky is not falling, define a "serenity now" window at night where smaller escalation levels don't go out.
I've been using Nagios + CruiseControl + Selenium for running high-level tests on mission critical web applications. I got burned pretty hard by a simple jquery error that stopped users from proceding through an online signup form.
http://www.agileatwork.com/the-holy-trinity-of-web-2-0-application-monitoring/
You can take a look at AlertGrid. This web application allows you to filter and forward alerts to your team (worldwide). It has also nice ability to monitor if something did not happen.
To paraphrase Richard Levasseur: ah, monitoring tools, how your imperfections frustrate me. There doesn't seem to be a perfect tool out there; Nagios is pretty easy to set up but the UI is kinda old fashioned and you have to have a daemon running on each server being monitored. Zenoss has a much nicer UI including trend graphs of resource usage, but it uses SNMP so you have to have some familiarity with that to get it working properly, and the documentation is not the best - there are hundreds of pages but it's really hard to find just the info you need to get started.
Friends of mine have also recommended Cacti and Hyperic, but I don't have personal experience with those.
One last thing - one of the other answers suggested running a tool that stresses your site. I wouldn't recommend doing that on your live site unless you have a reliable quiet period when nobody is hitting it; even then you might bring it down unexpectedly. Much better to have a staging server where you can run load tests before putting changes into production.
One of our clients uses Techout (www.techout.com) and is very pleased with the service.
There is no charge for alerts, no matter what kind or how many, and they offer email, voicemail and SMS alerts -- and if something major happens, a phone call from a live person to help you out.
It's all based on service -- you don't install the software and you have a consultant who works with you to determine the best approach for your business. It's one of the most convenient web application monitoring services because they take care of everything.
I would just add that you can predict error likelihood somewhat based on history of past errors and having fixed them. With smaller scale internal testing if you were to graph the frequency and severity of problems that have been corrected to this point you'll have an overview of predictable new problems. If everything has been running error free for some time now, then the two sources of trouble would be recent changes or scalability issues.
From the above it sounds like scalability is your only worry, but I just mention the past-error frequency test because the teams I've been on invariably think they got the last error fixed and there are no more. Until there is.
Changing the line a little bit, something I really think is useful and changed a lot how I monitor my apps is to log javascript exceptions somewhere. There's a very nice implementation that logs that directly from user browsers to Google Analytics.
This is a must for Javascript centered web applications, and can give you results based directly on users browsers what can lead to very unexpected errors (iE and mobile browser are pain)
Disclaimer: My post bellow
http://www.directperformance.com.br/en/javascript-debug-simples-com-google-analytics
For the internet presence monitoring, I would suggest the service that I am working on: Sucuri NBIM (Network-based integrity monitor).
It does availability and integrity checks, looking for changes on your internet presence (sites, DNS, WHOIS, headers, etc) and loss of connectivity. It is free and you can try it out here.
I have my first app, not that big, but it is the first step. (next big one on the way)
Now if I want to put it on my own Linode VPS, I have to configure mod_python or mod_wsgi, as well as memcache, Ngix, mySQL or Postgresql, etc. to make it work. If I put it GAE, All I have to do is convert the models to use GAE's API.
What I like about GAE is scaling. (if they can really do it)
Then I'd only worry about developing my apps and doing SEO work on them instead of worrying about load share/balance, cache, db / IO redundancy, etc.
I don't want to do any porting later on. (I have to decide now and stick with it)
So, if you have any experience on this, what do you recommend:
1- Use VPS(s) for everthing
2- Use VPS(s) plus Amazon S3
3- Use VPS(s) plus Amazon S3 & SimpleDB
4- Use GAE
Also: Would I be able to get away with not having JOIN rights when using the BigTable?
Note: I don't have any spatial need now, but for a location table I might need that later on.
I'd like to know what do you think!
There's business risk and technical risk.
Business risk is that you might have to move hosts later for some external reason. VPS's, EC2, etc require more upfront investment, but keep you independent. Tools like Chef can help with the configuration effort.
Technical risk is that your application may not be easily implemented on the platform. Since most VPS options allow you to install arbitrary software, they minimize this, again at the cost of more configuration effort on your part. AFAIK, the largest constraint GAE enforces on you is it's difficult to do long running background tasks. (Working without JOINs and other aspects of de-normalized data requires a different way of thinking, but this approach is fairly common in web applications no matter where they run once the SQL database is larger than a single host can support.)
If you can live with both these risks, GAE would appear to save you a substantial amount of effort. If you cannot live with these risks, you should tailor your own environment.
As an aside, I find S3 to be worth it no matter your environment. It's far simpler than ensuring your local server static file storage is reliably backed up, and you never have to worry about capacity. It's best if you use it for data that is uploaded but rarely overwritten or deleted (think facebook photo albums).
I don't want to do any porting later on. (I have to decide now and stick with it)
If that's the case, wouldn't you prefer to control deployment from the outset? It could be a great pain to port back from GAE later down the line if you hit its limits (whether they be technological limits or simply business decisions by Google that run counter to your plans for the future of your app).
Also configuring mod_wsgi, installing postgres etc. isn't particularly difficult, and you don't have to worry about things like load balancing and db redundancy for a while yet.
If it were me, I'd prefer the long-term certainty of a traditional server over the quick win of GAE. It all depends on your vision for the app, however.
I may be biased, but if you can live with GAE's limitations it really saves you a lot of work and worry about system administration issues (and to some extent scaling) -- plus, it's free as long as your resource consumption is low (basically meaning your traffic is low).
Can you do without joins? I don't know, as I don't know your app -- I'm a SQL fanatic, myself, yet for simple enough needs I haven't found it too hard to adapt. As I see it, the main limitation of non-relational DBs is that they're nowhere as nice as relational ones for "ad hoc" queries... you typically have to write a lot of procedural code instead of a nice SELECT or two:-(. But, that's more of a "data mining later" issue than one connected with serving your web app -- probably best solved by regularly bulk-downloading data from the web app's online storage to a "data warehouse" kind of setup, anyway, even if such storage was relational in the first place;-).
Before deciding, it might be worth a quick prototype adaptation of your app to GAE. You might run into stoppers that force the decision. Possible stopper issues include
Your schema doesn't make the transition to BigTable
You're depending on some C-based library that GAE doesn't support
You have a few long-running requests that exceed the thresholds that GAE imposes
The answer depends on the complexity and nature of your model layer, really. If it's complex or tightly bound to the rest of your code, porting is likely to be a significant effort. If it's fairly straightforward, or easy to tear out and replace, I would say go for it.
These days, I mostly write new code for GAE, but the fact that I can simply deploy with a single command has really lowered the barrier I feel towards writing cool new apps. Not having to worry about deployment and hosting is quite liberating.
All I have to do is convert the models to use GAE's API.
I am sorry, you are totally mistaken.
You also need to rewrite all the views code that uses the ORM. There are no joins. So you have to deal with and write a lot of procedural code instead of the nifty SQL that provides U whatever you want.
Querying is slow. You need to override save method of each model to store additional information of that model which may take a lot of time to compute when need. You also need to work on memcache to make the queries fast enough.
And then, Guido has said Django 1.1 is going to be included in a future version of Appengine. I am hoping they will have an out of the box generic ORM to BigTable mapper.
That said, if your app is simple without many joins needed, you could use the appengine patch project to use the current version of django on Appengine. Here is how.