AIOHTTP Backend Support RFC

[bitnom]

AIOHTTP is (IMO) a wonderful backend. Much performance can be gained with it, especially when combined with ProcessPoolExecutor and SO_REUSEPORT (Websockets supported), and there's a wealth of modules to extend it. Has there yet been any effort to add support for it, official or otherwise? I skimmed through django-idom but there's a lot going on there I'm unfamiliar with. I rarely use DJango unless I have to, much less go under-the-hood.

[rmorshea]

There has not. I wouldn't be turned off by the idea of creating a backend for AIOHTTP based on django-idom though. django-idom is much more complicated because Django itself is way more than just a web server. Examples of existing integrations distributed with the core IDOM library can be found here. Hopefully you'll find that these built-in backends are much simpler to implement. A spec for the routes backends must expose has not been documented, but the gist is that backends should have the following routes (copied from this PR):

/_idom/assets/<file-path>
/_idom/stream/<spa-path>
/_idom/modules/<file-path>
/<spa-path>

• /_idom/assets - where files found in the assets folder of the built client under idom.backend._common.CLIENT_BUILD_DIR
• /_idom/stream - websockets for the associated spa-path
• /_idom/modules - hosts web modules that can be dynamically loaded from idom.config.IDOM_WEB_MODULES_DIR
• /<spa-path> - the actual single-page-app (note that the client will use the same spa-path when connecting to a stream)

[rmorshea]

Just note that we're renaming this project to ReactPy and wont be able to accept any contributions until that's complete. Thankfully we're working on this right now and I expect that we'll have that done in the next week or two.

[bitnom]

Thanks for the info. That link is 404 btw. Looks like it's now here. I may take a crack at a backend.

[Archmonger]

Right now, Django-IDOM is the most feature complete way of using IDOM. Django might get a bit overwhelming due to built in support for database, cache, HTML templating and rendering, etc.

This 9 minute video summarize it pretty well. It's an extremely opinionated framework where most code must be written a certain way.

On the note of other ASGI frameworks though, long term we'd like contributions to support all major ASGI frameworks. I've been eyeing Blacksheep support for a while due to amazing performance benchmarks.

[bitnom]

wow there's a lot more built-in to blacksheep than I had realized.

As for Django, I just know I'd never start new projects with it. If it had competitive performance, I might change my mind. Otherwise, it might haunt my dreams. After having finally just gone through all the blacksheep docs, I won't be able to resist it.

[Archmonger]

Getting blacksheep working with IDOM should be pretty simple since it follows a flask-like API.

You can clone the IDOM backend.flask module and use that as a base.

[Archmonger]

Related note, Django ASGI performance is currently severely hurt by the fact that they made the decision to prioritize WSGI performance at all costs... Kinda ironic since Django actually wrote the ASGI spec. So right now ASGI in Django is more of a gimmick than a feature.

I've been planning on developing an ASYNC_ONLY mode in Django that inverts that decision. Whether that be PR'd upstream or an external monkey-patch package is yet to be seen. But, a lot of that design will be made in inspiration of blacksheep with the goal of providing modern ASGI performance to Django.