Heroku warning deploying to non-production when multiple apps - ruby-on-rails

I have a one codebase multiple websites (for UK, US etc) setup on Heroku with Rails 4. All works, except when I push to Heroku I see this in the terminal:
remote: ###### WARNING:
remote: You are deploying to a non-production environment: "production_uk".
I have these production rails envs:
production
production_uk
production_us
In my gemfile (and also some other files) I have these environments configured so for example I load puma but I was wondering if I should mind this warning? Maybe heroku treats non-production apps with lower priority or something like this?
I even tried to name rack env "production" while keeping rails env "production_uk" but that had no effect.
Thanks in advanceí!

sounds like you are not setting RAILS_ENV to production, heroku I believe warns you if this is not set.
are you using RAILS_ENV to control your country? if so instead use a different variable for that purpose.
It sounds like you are using RAILS_ENV to control which country the server is supporting. This is why heroku is giving you the warning. It expects to see RAILS_ENV='production'.
I would recommend you set up a separate environment variable (i.e. COUNTRY) and use this to control the country specific configuration of your app rather than than RAILS_ENV

Related

Are there any reasons not to use RAILS_ENV=staging on Heroku?

The Heroku documentation at https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/deploying-to-a-custom-rails-environment says I shouldn't use a staging.rb file to define my staging environment.
It may be tempting to create another custom environment such as “staging” and create a config/environments/staging.rb and deploy to a Heroku app with RAILS_ENV=staging.
This is not a good practice. Instead we recommend always running in production mode and modifying any behavior by setting your config vars.
I think this is terrible advice and conflicts with well-established Rails best practice. However, I'm not here to argue about best practices. I'm here to ask:
Are there any reasons not to use RAILS_ENV=staging on Heroku?
Is there anything that will break if I create a staging.rb file and set the xxx_ENV config vars like this?
heroku config:add RACK_ENV=staging --remote staging
heroku config:add RAILS_ENV=staging --remote staging
No, there isn't anything that will break if you do this.
However, I do think that Heroku is right here (note that I work at Heroku).
It introduces possible differences between your staging and production environments, when the only thing that changes between them should be configuration variables.
Heroku already provides a secure mean of setting configuration variables, with the config:set command.
Using 2 config files means you have to maintain the same configuration twice, and possible can have issues because you updated the configuration correctly in staging, but incorrectly in production.
As a side note, RACK_ENV should only ever have 3 values: production, development and none. See https://www.hezmatt.org/~mpalmer/blog/2013/10/13/rack_env-its-not-for-you.html
You'll get some warnings from Heroku when you deploy, but I can confirm I did run staging apps, with RAILS_ENV=staging, on Heroku. As long as you set the correct environment variables and Gemfile groups, it should just work.
My guess is that the reason they advise not to use custom environments is that they have some operational tooling that assumes your Rails app runs in production environment, but so far I didn't run into issues.

Are you using custom rails environments?

ootb rails has the 3 environments
development
test
production
How do you handle your other environments for example staging ?
When I think about what I want from a staging environment I want most of the production settings, but typically server names and other specific values are different from production.
Do you create 1:N environment/*.rb for each custom environment you have? Or do you treat the environments more as like a profile and then use something like application.yml or secrets.yml for running the application with different server configurations?
What has worked well for you in the past and what has not?
It depends if your "staging" environment is a different thing or is actually a variation on the "production" environment as is usually the case.
Normally you just deploy in full production mode, using the production.rb file and everything, to a non-production server. This distinction is irrelevant to rails, and matters only to your deployment script. For example Capistrano would be concerned about this.
The only time you need another environment is if you need a different group of settings for Rails.
In my opinion, when I run the app in an staging environment I want it to have exactly the same settings as in production, because it's when I check if everything is alright before releasing the new code. So I create a environments/staging.rb that actually is a symbolic link to environments/production.rb. To deploy, I use Capistrano, which lets you define the server settings for every environment you want to. I really encourage you to take a look at it if you don't know it, as it makes deploying as easy as running a simple command, and it takes care of uploading the new code, precompiling the assets, restarting the server, etc.
Appropriate any way described above.
In some cases I am using 1:N way because it easy when you have fixed count of deployment environments (for example when I am deploying own pet-project to remote server).
But in other cases I am using default set of environments (for example when I am deploying project to different customers).
Just choose any way appropriate for you and your project.
I use require_relative to create a staging environment that is identical to production, and then override the parts that are different. Typically the only difference is hostnames.
Here's what my environments/staging.rb looks like:
# Staging configuration is identical to production, with some overrides
# for hostname, etc.
require_relative "./production"
Rails.application.configure do
config.action_mailer.default_url_options = {
:host => "staging.example.com",
:protocol => "https"
}
config.action_mailer.asset_host = "https://staging.example.com"
end

Heroku app id within the application environment

Is it possible to retrieve the app id (app123#heroku.com) within the application environment?
I know, that I can manually set a config var, but I figured such info could be exposed by Heroku?
If you have an add-on like SendGrid or Memcache installed, you can access the environment variables for the username of one of those add-ons. For example, if you were using Ruby, you can log into the console and output the value of ENV['SENDGRID_USERNAME'] or ENV['MEMCACHE_USERNAME']. It's easy to extract the app id from there. I'm not sure which other add-ons also expose that value in an environment variable but you can output the entire ENV global hash and find out what's available.
I used Jared's solution for over a year.
Today I ran into an issue when ENV['SENDGRID_USERNAME'] was not there yet (during deployment).
Heroku recommends to set a config var for this yourself, so I set:
heroku config:add APP_NAME=<myappname> --app <myappname>
And enable lab feature that allows you to use them during compile
heroku labs:enable user-env-compile -a myapp
And now I have my app name available here:
ENV["APP_NAME"] # '<myappname>'
So I won't run into the issue again, though I would like to get this kind of info set from Heroku instead.
This is straight from my support ticket with Heroku:
You cannot retrieve that value yourself. This is a value that SendGrid support requires that only Heroku support can supply to them.
So you will need to ask Heroku for it via a support ticket
UPDATE
Somewhat contradictorily, I found I could access my Heroku app id by running:
heroku config:get SENDGRID_USERNAME
app171441466#heroku.com

Running a Rails site: development vs production

I'm learning Ruby on Rails. At the moment I'm just running my site locally with rails server in the OS X Terminal. What changes when a Rails site is run on a production box?
Is the site still started with rails server?
Any differences with how the db is setup?
Note: I'm running Rails 3.
A rails app can be run in production calling rails server -e production, although 99% of the time you'll be serving on something like passenger or thin instead of WEBrick, which means there's a different command to start the server. (thin start -e production for instance)
This is a complicated question, but the best place to start learning about the differences would be to look at the specific environment.rb files. When rails boots up it starts with the environment file that matches the called environment, ie if you start it in development it begins by loading your development.rb file, or if you're in production it will load the production.rb file. The differences in environments are mostly the result of these differences in the various environment config files.
Basically if a Rails 3.1 app is in production mode, then by default it is not going to be compiling assets on the fly, and a lot of caching will be going on that isn't happening in development. Also, when you get error messages they will be logged but not rendered to the user, instead the static error page from your public directory will be used.
To get more insight into this, I would suggest reading the relevant rails guides:
Rails Initialization Guide: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/initialization.html
Rails Configuration Guide: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/configuring.html
There are two contexts you can use the word "production" here. One of them is running the server in production mode. You can do this locally by,
RAILS_ENV=production ./script/server
The configuration for this is picked up from config/environments/production.rb. Try comparing this file with config/environments/development.rb. There are only subtle differences like caching classes. Development mode makes it easier so that it will respond to any changes you make instantly. Plus there are two different databases (by default) will be used namely yourproject_development and yourproject_production if you choose to run your server in either of these modes.
On the other hand, rails deployment to a production box is something different. You will need to pick your server carefully. You may have to deal with a deployment script may be capistrano. You may also need a load balancer such as netgear. The database also may require a deep consideration like size expectation, master/slave clustering etc.,
Note: I have never used Rails 3. This answer is biased towards 2.3.x.

Ruby on Rails: How to set which development environment an app runs in?

I'm relatively new to Ruby on Rails and occasionally I find this convention-over-configuration stuff a little confusing as a lot of things seemed to be hidden from the developer, as in this case.
I'm using rails 2.3.8 and when I run my app locally through NetBeans 6.9/Mongrel on my system it runs using the development environment parameters.. when I deploy it to a Fedora box and run it there in Apache HTTPD it automatically runs using the production environment parameters.
How does my app know which environment to use? I haven't changed anything in my app to set the environment.. both versions locally and on my Fedora box are identical. I can't find anywhere in the code where it is setting the environment.. so how is this working?
Thanks.
In httpd.conf file, write the following in VirtualHost:-
## Specify Rails Environment here,
default value is "production"
RailsEnv development
Thanks...
The primary way to specify rails mode is RAILS_ENV environment variable (I assume development is default, when nothing is specified). You can check its value in bash, echo $RAILS_ENV.
You can also modify ENV['RAILS_ENV'] in your config file to change the mode:
ENV['RAILS_ENV'] = 'production'
edit
I've never used rails with apache, but I think passenger mod can also specify this variable somewhere, checking apache configs might help.

Resources