Django 3.1
djangoproject.com
Django 3.1
1–10 of 209 posts
Re: Django 3.1
#2[deleted]
Re: Django 3.1
#3Cool, they've implemented async views.
ASGI has kinda passed me by. For some small project's I use Gunicorn.
What's the setup for ASGI that's popular?
Re: Django 3.1
#4Slightly OT:
How does HN feel about the recent craze to make web python asynchronous?
To me, the performance gains are dubious in many cases and the complexity overhead of handling cooperative multitasking just seems like a step back for a language like python.
Re: Django 3.1
#5I've been using 3.1 alpha/beta for a while and it's got some pretty nice improvements. "JSONField for all databases" is a huge deal IMO, as it simplifies a lot of fairly common use cases.
Re: Django 3.1
#6JSONField has been an absolute godsend in combination with Django's ORM. I had been using it with Postgres and will likely keep our backend the same, but I cannot recommend it enough. You will have to write some validation and schema code on top if you want your data to have similar (but weaker) guarantees to the usual typed fields; the benefits from the flexibility you get are immeasurable though.
Re: Django 3.1
#7Slightly OT: How does HN feel about the recent craze to make web python asynchronous? To me, the performance gains are dubious in many cases and the complexity overhead of handling cooperative multitasking just seems like a step back for a language like python.
I feel like it's too little too late, but the idea is good. There's an obligatory reading:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23218782
Five times later, there are some new frameworks, but much of the ecosystem is still sync-only. This is actually one of the things that is pushing me towards Go lately. Python just doesn't seem to mature fast enough and tools heavily disagree on conventions.
Re: Django 3.1
#8Pardon the rant, but I feel that the advantages don't outweigh the fact that with each release some of my stuff gets broken and I need to adjust. Django puts DeprecationWarnings basically everywhere and it's a hell to maintain projects that had been alive for a few years. God forbid you do anything with the interfaces they expose. The problem is only getting worse when you consider your dependencies, which in many cases don't keep up with the release cycle of Django. It's a mess.
Re: Django 3.1
#9Slightly OT: How does HN feel about the recent craze to make web python asynchronous? To me, the performance gains are dubious in many cases and the complexity overhead of handling cooperative multitasking just seems like a step back for a language like python.
Well, if you have external API calls in your Django app and you are running sync (which I would absolutely advice, with running async it is really easy to get an unpredictable performance which is sometimes hard to track down) having the ability to run some views async is really crucial.
Otherwise your application might me humming along smoothly at some point and coming to a sudden complete standstill or performance plummets when a random external API endpoint starts to time out. Yes I have been bitten by this :-)
To fix this while running sync I have dedicated separate application processes for the views that do external calls, but this makes the routing complex. Alternatively you can juggle timeouts on the external API calls but this is hard to get right and you need to constantly keep track if calls are not timed out just because the external endpoint is a bit slower at some point.
So I think this solves a very real-world challenge.
Re: Django 3.1
#10JSONField has been an absolute godsend in combination with Django's ORM. I had been using it with Postgres and will likely keep our backend the same, but I cannot recommend it enough. You will have to write some validation and schema code on top if you want your data to have similar (but weaker) guarantees to the usual typed fields; the benefits from the flexibility you get are immeasurable though.
Can you give some examples where a relational schema isn’t suitable?