I have this code in ApplicationController (Ruby on Rails 4.1):
before_action :make_action_mailer_use_request_host_and_protocol
def make_action_mailer_use_request_host_and_protocol
ActionMailer::Base.default_url_options[:protocol] = request.protocol
ActionMailer::Base.default_url_options[:host] = request.host_with_port
ActionMailer::Base.asset_host = "#{request.protocol}#{request.host_with_port}"
end
Is it thread-safe? Consider scenario:
Server starts processing request for host foo.example.com. It sets the host for ActionMailer.
Another request comes in before server finishes processing the first one, this time for host bar.example.com. Server sets ActionMailer host to bar.example.com.
Execution returns to the first request. Now server sends email. What will be the host in the email, foo.example.com or bar.example.com?
Unfortunately, the method described above is not thread-safe and the scenario you have outlined would be problematic.
Creating a default_url_options method in your controller is currently the most idiomatic (and thread-safe) way to accomplish this.
I have found Simone Carletti's actionmailer_with_request gem to be an ideal solution to the problem you seem to be facing.
Related
I have a typical Rails REST Api written for a http consumers. However, it turns out they need web socket API because of the integration POS Machines.
The typical API looks like this;
class Api::Pos::V1::TransactionsController < ApplicationController
before_action :authenticate
def index
#transactions = #current_business.business_account.business_deposits.last(5)
render json: {
status: 200,
number: #transactions.count,
transactions: #transactions.as_json(only: [:created_at, :amount, :status, :client_card_number, :client_phone_number])
}
end
private
def request_params
params.permit(:account_number, :api_key)
end
def authenticate
render status: 401, json: {
status: 401,
error: "Authentication Failed."
} unless current_business
end
def current_business
account_number = request_params[:account_number].to_s
api_key = request_params[:api_key].to_s
if account_number and api_key
account = BusinessAccount.find_by(account_number: account_number)
if account && Business.find(account.business_id).business_api_key.token =~ /^(#{api_key})/
#current_business = account.business
else
false
end
end
end
end
How can i serve the same responses using web-sockets?
P.S: Never worked with sockets before
Thank you
ActionCable
I would second Dimitris's reference to ActionCable, as it's expected to become part of Rails 5 and should (hopefully) integrate with Rails quite well.
Since Dimitris suggested SSE, I would recommend against doing so.
SSE (Server Sent Events) use long polling and I would avoid this technology for many reasons which include the issue of SSE connection interruptions and extensibility (websockets allow you to add features that SSE won't support).
I am almost tempted to go into a rant about SSE implementation performance issues, but... even though websocket implementations should be more performant, many of them suffer from similar issues and the performance increase is often only in thanks to the websocket connection's longer lifetime...
Plezi
Plezi* is a real-time web application framework for Ruby. You can either use it on it's own (which is not relevant for you) or together with Rails.
With only minimal changes to your code, you should be able to use websockets to return results from your RESTful API. Plezi's Getting Started Guide has a section about unifying the backend's RESTful and Websocket API's. Implementing it in Rails should be similar.
Here's a bit of Demo code. You can put it in a file called plezi.rb and place it in your application's config/initializers folder...
Just make sure you're not using any specific Servers (thin, puma, etc'), allowing Plezi to override the server and use the Iodine server, and remember to add Plezi to your Gemfile.
class WebsocketDemo
# authenticate
def on_open
return close unless current_business
end
def on_message data
data = JSON.parse(data) rescue nil
return close unless data
case data['msg']
when /\Aget_transactions\z/i
# call the RESTful API method here, if it's accessible. OR:
transactions = #current_business.business_account.business_deposits.last(5)
write {
status: 200,
number: transactions.count,
# the next line has what I think is an design flaw, but I left it in
transactions: transactions.as_json(only: [:created_at, :amount, :status, :client_card_number, :client_phone_number])
# # Consider, instead, to avoid nesting JSON streams:
# transactions: transactions.select(:created_at, :amount, :status, :client_card_number, :client_phone_number)
}.to_json
end
end
# don't disclose inner methods to the router
protected
# better make the original method a class method, letting you reuse it.
def current_business
account_number = params[:account_number].to_s
api_key = params[:api_key].to_s
if account_number && api_key
account = BusinessAccount.find_by(account_number: account_number)
if account && Business.find(account.business_id).business_api_key.token =~ /^(#{api_key})/
return (#current_business = account.business)
end
false
end
end
end
Plezi.route '/(:api_key)/(:account_number)', WebsocketDemo
Now we have a route that looks something like: wss://my.server.com/app_key/account_number
This route can be used to send and receive data in JSON format.
To get the transaction list, the client side application can send:
JSON.stringify({msg: "get_transactions"})
This will result in data being send to the client's websocket.onmessage callback with the last five transactions.
Of course, this is just a short demo, but I think it's a reasonable proof of concept.
* I should point out that I'm biased, as I'm Plezi's author.
P.S.
I would consider moving the authentication into a websocket "authenticate" message, allowing the application key to be sent in a less conspicuous manner.
EDIT
These are answers to the questions in the comments.
Capistrano
I don't use Capistrano, so I'm not sure... but, I think it would work if you add the following line to your Capistrano tasks:
Iodine.protocol = false
This will prevent the server from auto-starting, so your Capistrano tasks flow without interruption.
For example, at the beginning of the config/deploy.rb you can add the line:
Iodine.protocol = false
# than the rest of the file, i.e.:
set :deploy_to, '/var/www/my_app_name'
#...
You should also edit your rakefile and add the same line at the beginning of the rakefile, so your rakefile includes the line:
Iodine.protocol = false
Let me know how this works. Like I said, I don't use Capistrano and I haven't tested it out.
Keeping Passenger using a second app
The Plezi documentation states that:
If you really feel attached to your thin, unicorn, puma or passanger server, you can still integrate Plezi with your existing application, but they won't be able to share the same process and you will need to utilize the Placebo API (a guide is coming soon).
But the guide isn't written yet...
There's some information in the GitHub Readme, but it will be removed after the guide is written.
Basically you include the Plezi application with the Redis URL inside your Rails application (remember to make sure to copy all the gems used in the gemfile). than you add this line:
Plezi.start_placebo
That should be it.
Plezi will ignore the Plezi.start_placebo command if there is no other server defined, so you can put the comment in a file shared with the Rails application as long as Plezi's gem file doesn't have a different server.
You can include some or all of the Rails application code inside the Plezi application. As long as Plezi (Iodine, actually) is the only server in the Plezi GEMFILE, it should work.
The applications will synchronize using Redis and you can use your Plezi code to broadcast websocket events inside your Rails application.
You may want to have a look at https://github.com/rails/actioncable which is the Rails way to deal with WebSockets, but currently in Alpha.
Judging from your code snippet, the client seems to only consume data from your backend. I'm skeptical whether you really need WebSockets. Ιf the client won't push data back to the server, Server Sent Events seem more appropriate.
See relevant walk-through and documentation.
I have a class variable that I initialize, that later magically becomes uninitialized by itself... When developing locally on rails' default server (WEBrick), there is no problem. This only happens on nginx on ec2. Here's some code..
def TestController < ApplicationController
##classVariable = ""
def index
##classVariable = "What's up homie"
log(##classVariable)
end
def callThisMethodViaAJAXFromJavascript
log("reached this method")
log(##classVariable)
end
def log(str)
File.write("aValidPath", str)
end
end
Here's what I do: When I load the page on test/index, the index method executes, and properly logs ##classVariable as:
"What's up homie"
But when I call the method callThisMethodViaAJAXFromJavascript via AJAX from the frontend, my log file looks like:
"reached this method"
""
Again, this ONLY occurs on nginx on, ec2 (OS is ubuntu). When I run locally on WEBrick, this NEVER happens.
Any ideas? Thank you very much.
You don't say how you're using nginx (as a reverse proxy to some unicorn instances, with passenger etc) but either way you would typically have multiple instances of your application. Each one is a separate process so setting a class variable in one process has no effect on the other process.
Nginx will balance requests between the rails instances - so the index page is served by one instance and the ajax action will frequently be served by another process where the clas variable is still the empty string.
In development with webrick there is only one rails instance so you don't encounter this problem. I'm not sure what you were trying to do but class variables are not a good way to preserve state across requests
Per #Frederick's answer, I used the rails session instead to store the variable.
As a rule of thumb, it seems like you should NOT use global variables nor class variables in rails if your variables are changing.
The values stored in the session object are the same from any process in rails. Though the pointer to the session may be different, the values will remain the same. Here's another post about sessions that goes more into detail:
How is rails session shared among unicorn workers?
In my requirement ,there are different domain names for single project.I would like to send reset password link with a domain name where the user requested for the reset password.For that I have done the follows in application_controller.rb and it works well.
before_filter :set_mailer_host
def set_mailer_host
ActionMailer::Base.default_url_options[:host] = request.host_with_port
$url_host = request.host_with_port
end
Later,I have used sidekiq for delayed mailer and updated like follows on entire application
Notifier.delay.password_reset(user.id)
As the mailer was configured with sidekiq it was using default domain name provided in configuration only and it was not using the dynamic domain name provided from request on application_controller.rb
Any suggestion to get the dynamic domain on mailers running by sidekiq would be greatly appreciated.
Rails - 3.2.8
Ruby - 1.9.3
sidekiq - 2.13.1
Thanks!!!
One of the options would be to associate each user with a domain and use this information when sending the email in sidekiq.
You'll need to construct the url yourself rather than rely on AM to do it for you.
We have a very unique use case where we want a Rails controller to access a route within the Rails app using Net::HTTP. Can this be done? I'm currently receiving a timeout when attempting to do so. The current code works when the uri is a separate Rails app, but not when the uri belongs to the app itself. Here's the gist of the current controller action:
def export_data
uri = URI("http://localhost:3000")
#data = JSON.parse( Net::HTTP.get(uri) )
respond_to do |format|
...
end
end
Forget why we want to do this. Why doesn't this work? Is there a modification that can be made to get it to work? Thanks in advance!
It doesn't work because you are not using a multi-threaded server. Your request is coming in and blocking the server until it's complete. During that time, you're making a request to your localhost that isn't being handled.
Easy solution? Try puma. Other easy solution, spin up two rails instances, connect to the 2nd instance.
I've got a couple Engine plugins with metal endpoints that implement some extremely simple web services I intend to share across multiple applications. They work just fine as they are, but obviously, while loading them locally for development and testing, sending Net::HTTP a get_response message to ask localhost for another page from inside the currently executing controller object results in instant deadlock.
So my question is, does Rails' (or Rack's) routing system provide a way to safely consume a web service which may or may not be a part of the same app under the same server instance, or will I have to hack a special case together with render_to_string for those times when the hostname in the URI matches my own?
It doesn't work in development because it's only serving one request at a time, and the controller's request gets stuck. If you need this you can run multiple server locally behind a load balancer. I recommend using Passenger even for development (and the prefpane if you are on OS X).
My recommendation for you is to separate the internal web services and the applications that use them. This way you do not duplicate the code and you can easily scale and control them individually.
This is in fact possible. However, you need to ensure that the services you call are not calling each other recursively.
A really simple "reentrant" Rack middleware could work like this:
class Reentry < Struct.new(:app)
def call(env)
#current_env = env
app.call(env.merge('reentry' => self)
end
def call_rack(request_uri)
env_for_recursive_call = #current_env.dup
env_for_recursive_call['PATH_INFO'] = request_uri # ...and more
status, headers, response = call(env_for_recursive_call)
# for example, return response as a String
response.inject(''){|part, buf| part + buf }
end
end
Then in the calling code:
env['reentry'].call_rack('/my/api/get-json')
A very valid use case for this is sideloading API responses in JSON
format within your main page.
Obviously the success of this technique will depend on the sophistication
of your Rack stack (as some parts of the Rack env will not like being reused).