Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: Switch from WSGI to ASGI (attempt #2) #21572

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 16, 2024
Merged

feat: Switch from WSGI to ASGI (attempt #2) #21572

merged 4 commits into from
Apr 16, 2024

Conversation

frankh
Copy link
Contributor

@frankh frankh commented Apr 16, 2024

Problem

see #21334

Changes

👉 Stay up-to-date with PostHog coding conventions for a smoother review.

Does this work well for both Cloud and self-hosted?

How did you test this code?

canary deploy 🐤

@frankh frankh added the canary label Apr 16, 2024
@frankh frankh requested a review from danielxnj April 16, 2024 13:31
frankh added 4 commits April 16, 2024 14:32
By default I don't believe this will change anything (everything runs
sync by default), but it will allow us to wrap e.g. clickhouse calls in
sync_to_async wrappers to stop them blocking for ages
This was relying on wsgi_environ which is replaced by asgi_scope
@frankh frankh merged commit d948a18 into master Apr 16, 2024
51 checks passed
@frankh frankh deleted the frank/asgi branch April 16, 2024 13:47
Copy link

sentry-io bot commented Apr 16, 2024

Suspect Issues

This pull request was deployed and Sentry observed the following issues:

  • ‼️ TypeError: 'bool' object is not iterable posthog.settings.sentry in traces_sampler View Issue

Did you find this useful? React with a 👍 or 👎

frankh added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2024
frankh added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2024
Revert "feat: Switch from WSGI to ASGI (attempt #2) (#21572)"

This reverts commit d948a18.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants