On Sunday, 31 May 2015 11:15:28 UTC+2, Federico Capoano wrote: > > On Sunday, May 31, 2015 at 10:52:26 AM UTC+2, Emil Stenström wrote: > ... > >> Also, I don't think you would need to mix redis (or any other persistent >> storage) into this. The connected clients could simply be stored in an >> in-memory array, that is discarded if the server crashes. When the server >> is started again the clients will automatically connect again, and the list >> of clients would be built up again. >> > > How would a distributed setup be handled by this approach? > I mean: multiple instances of the sse behind a loadbalancer. >
I think the simplest way would be to just set up two different processes, and don't let all clients connect to the same one. Django could then maintain a list of all processes and send the same message to each process. Each process would then be responsible to forward it to its own set of clients. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/99c84109-8486-46e9-9f23-2e5c8a02c567%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
