Re: Channels vs Django-websocket-redis

2017-08-09 Thread John Byrne
Thanks for the reply. I didn't realize that ws4redis doesn't have the 
concepts of consumers and routing. That's something I'll have to look into 
further. The documentation for ws4redis isn't great so that makes it 
harder. 

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 9:19:24 AM UTC-4, Artem Malyshev wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I look at django-websockets-redis really quickly. If you decide to use 
> Redis ASGI layer it may look familiar.
>
> Main differences I notice so far:
>
> - ws4redis doesn't have concept of consumers and routing
> - it's coupled to the subset of WebSocket usage
> - it's propagate redis to the library api
>
> On another hand Django Channels 
>
> - can be used with different channels layers (redis, rabbitmq, ipc, 
> inmemory)
> - have clean api based on consumers and routing
> - can handle more than just websockets. HTTP2 and HTTP1.1 are supported. 
> Chat protocols like slack or irc are possible.
> - you can trigger consumers from other consumers, without talking to 
> websocket.
>
> On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 1:09:44 PM UTC+3, John Byrne wrote:
>>
>> I'm trying to evaluate these two Websockets solutions for Django. Has 
>> anyone here done compared these?
>>
>> I don't fully understand what the differences between them are. I think 
>> the main difference is that Channels can generalize all requests (websocket 
>> or request/response) to be handled by channel consumers, but if that's the 
>> case, then:
>>
>> 1. I think you only get that if you have all your traffic come through 
>> ASGI (Daphne), right? If you route WSGI traffic and Websockets traffic 
>> separately, then wouldn't you really have something similar to the solution 
>> described here: 
>> http://django-websocket-redis.readthedocs.io/en/latest/running.html#django-with-websockets-for-redis-behind-nginx-using-uwsgi.
>>  
>> Or is there still some big difference between that solution and Channels?
>>
>> 2. If #1 above is the main difference, I don't fully understand what the 
>> advantage(s) of this are. Is the ASGI-only mode required in order to have 
>> the websockets code and the wsgi code share the Django session? 
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-users.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-users/44769a05-2bf9-4c6a-96ee-96d8af4d74ee%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: Channels vs Django-websocket-redis

2017-08-05 Thread Artem Malyshev
Hi,

I look at django-websockets-redis really quickly. If you decide to use 
Redis ASGI layer it may look familiar.

Main differences I notice so far:

- ws4redis doesn't have concept of consumers and routing
- it's coupled to the subset of WebSocket usage
- it's propagate redis to the library api

On another hand Django Channels 

- can be used with different channels layers (redis, rabbitmq, ipc, 
inmemory)
- have clean api based on consumers and routing
- can handle more than just websockets. HTTP2 and HTTP1.1 are supported. 
Chat protocols like slack or irc are possible.
- you can trigger consumers from other consumers, without talking to 
websocket.

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 1:09:44 PM UTC+3, John Byrne wrote:
>
> I'm trying to evaluate these two Websockets solutions for Django. Has 
> anyone here done compared these?
>
> I don't fully understand what the differences between them are. I think 
> the main difference is that Channels can generalize all requests (websocket 
> or request/response) to be handled by channel consumers, but if that's the 
> case, then:
>
> 1. I think you only get that if you have all your traffic come through 
> ASGI (Daphne), right? If you route WSGI traffic and Websockets traffic 
> separately, then wouldn't you really have something similar to the solution 
> described here: 
> http://django-websocket-redis.readthedocs.io/en/latest/running.html#django-with-websockets-for-redis-behind-nginx-using-uwsgi.
>  
> Or is there still some big difference between that solution and Channels?
>
> 2. If #1 above is the main difference, I don't fully understand what the 
> advantage(s) of this are. Is the ASGI-only mode required in order to have 
> the websockets code and the wsgi code share the Django session? 
>
> Thanks!
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-users.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-users/72805cbf-05c6-4cad-b4c3-e7243e88ae7c%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.