I'd really like to use Piwik but what I've found so far is that it needs to run on a webserver with PHP support. Node.js web apps have their own webserver so how can I integrate the two or in other words, how can I set up Piwik to access the Node.js web app?
Also, if I were to push the web app to production, does it mean that I'll have to use two runtime environments -- one for PHP and one for Node.js -- to support the web app?
how can I set up Piwik to access the Node.js web app?
I'm not sure I understand that question. In any case Piwik is a PHP application that needs a PHP webserver (will run with Apache or Nginx for example).
The Node application will be its own webserver. You cannot run Piwik in your Node webserver, or your node app in the PHP webserver.
However nothing prevents you to install on the same server a PHP webserver and your node application/webserver and put them behind (for example) Nginx. Nginx would expose the application for e.g. http://yourapp.com and expose Piwik for e.g. http://piwik.yourapp.com.
Also, if I were to push the web app to production, does it mean that I'll have to use two runtime environments -- one for PHP and one for Node.js -- to support the web app?
Yes, unless you put your Piwik elsewhere (i.e. a second server, or also see the hosting page or even Piwik Cloud).
Related
I'm new to SPA development, so this may be a stupid question. please understand.
My question is "Is SPA(Single Page Application) needs a Application Server?"
As I understand it, the SPA gets the response after calling REST API. It use that response to re-render.
If so, is the server that handles REST API "Application Server"?
So many posts say Application Server are tomcat, oracle, etc... and they are also say Application Server handle the request to access the database. Then what is "Application Server" in SPA? or there are no Application Server in SPA?
(Are there any architectures or systems I'm not aware of?)
If I'm misunderstanding the architecture, please let me know.
I want to understand web server and Application Server in SPA. So I have read many posts but I'm still confused.
Thanks.
A SPA needs one server to serve the SPA bundle to the users browser.
If the SPA interacts with an API or APIs, the API(s) could be hosted on the same server that served the SPA bundle, or they could be hosted on other servers.
A Single Page App requires a server to serve the .css, index.html, and .js files it requires. It is not a requirement that that an SPA must communicate with an application server via any means at all.
Your content can be static or self generated by the app itself. Should you require communication with a backend server, you can consume that via some sort of api over
protocols such as http, https, websockets or Server Side Events.
To summarize. An SPA can be completely self contained OR access an api to provide functionality. A standalone app requires a server only to serve the component files (.css, .js, .html) of the app itself.
With SPA as well you will have html file and images, js, css files that will be loaded when you launch your single html webpage. So you need to host this static content on some server. So it can be separate web server or same APIs
server(Application Server) which can host these static content and serve request for those files. It can be also hosted on cloud static server and distributed via CDN
Short answer:
Yes. SPA apps do need to live somewhere (as you need to host the assets (js, css, initial html, other)
Long Answer:
You need to setup somewhere to host the entry files as per the short answer. In the past I've used anything from:
NodeJS code base services running on a Docker container (app & assets being served via express), to
dotnetcore on a similar stack (With kestrel server serving the assets running on docker on ec2).
Docker container running Apache webserver hosting the statically compiled assets
More recently I've dabbled with compiling the SPA app to a bunch of static assets (such as the ability NextJS / Gatsby provides with their tooling, but there are tons of others or alternatives in other SPA worlds)... but even then you'll need to host those assets somewhere.
S3 on Amazon has the ability to host SPA apps directly via a bucket setting & providing an entry point
Vercel (...or any other SaaS alternatives, Vercel is just where I host my personal stuff and has been easy to get going)
Again it's all up to you, but yes, you still need to make the JavaScript available somehow, you just need to pick your mechanic. SaaS with a baked in WebServer such as Vercel, a CDN like S3 that AWS provides, or go totally custom and spin up your own WebServer as application entry.
I have been working on this app on my localhost, which has Flask as the backend (localhost:5000) and React as the front end (localhost:3000), and they have been communicating well. Now I am supposed to put it up online so that other ppl can see it as well - I didn't have much experience in Azure, but how can I deploy these two components(React&Flask) into one URL on Azure web app service? (Before I had some experience in using FTP to upload the 'build' folder to a "site/wwwroot" folder to put up a simple React app without any backend)
Newest
After testing, the python project is deployed in the webapp, the react project is deployed in the virtual application, and the normal node project is also deployed in the virtual application.
Deploy the flask python project to the windows environment, the normal deployment method will fail, please be sure to follow this blog document (third-party document) to operate, it works for me.
Running Flask app with HttpPlatformHandler in Azure App Services
The effect is shown in the figure. You can see that the normal node project can be accessed normally, but the react project is not. I think there are some bugs. (Has raised a support ticket to confirm)
The deployment method of virtual application is recommended to adopt the publishing method shown in the figure below.
Privious
It is recommended to choose windows when creating azure web app, because windows supports virtual application.
We can deploy flask app normally and deploy react app in virtual app.
Under normal circumstances, the process.env.port of the two webapps is the same and will not interfere with each other because of the virtual path.
Reference post:
1. Vue Frontend and Express backend on same Azure web app Service
2. Azure Front Door Is Not Maintaining Custom Domain in Browser
I am very new to deploy Django and AWS. So now I would like to deploy my separate project (drf + react) to AWS.
So How can I deploy the separate project to AWS?
EC2 vs Elastic BeanStalk which one is better for that kind of environment?
I already search for one day but I found nothing useful information and found the similar thing but I don't understand like that=>
Deploying Separate React Frontend and Django DRF API
You asked a difficult question. I think I can make it bit easy for you.
First let's look at the differences in the options.
Serving the front end app
Option1: Django to serve react app
In this option, the Django app will serve your app in a route for e.g /app/. Basically the route /app will load react app's index.html. it's that simple.
In order for this to work, you need to build your react app using npm run build and copy the files to Django's static folder. good so far?
One of the benefits option 1 gives, option 2 doesn't is, you can use the same domain for backend and frontend for e.g www.example.com.
Option 2: deploy front end in S3
You still need to build the react app using npm run build, but you will not copy that to Django, in other words, you don't want to Django to serve your front end app, you want s3 to serve the static website. this method requires a separate subdomain or domain to host the react app.
Thats is the only difference between the options. Your frontend app will make api calls to the Django api, thats same for both options.My preferred option is option 2 to reduce complexity.
Deployment
I would pick elasticbeanstalk because it's easy to start with. You can do everything in the elasticbeanstalk console from load balancer to SSL, Healthcheck, Changing EC2 Keypair for EC2 Instance etc. Deployment is very easy. It supports multiple environments, You can use one AWS account for your test and production environments.
I want set up a fullstack app with strapi and react. All tutorials i've seen say to deploy frontend on netlify and backend to something like heroku. Is there a posibility to deploy full app at one hosting?
I mean user entering website will get react app and backend will be running at onother port on the same hosing
You can host both the front end(react) and backend(strapi) on heroku.
they can be hosted as two different individual apps running on different dynos and they can even be hosted as a single app together.
see this answer:
How to deploy Strapi backend and ReactJS frontend to a single Heroku app
You definitely can deploy both on the same server, the question is whether you should do that.
What if your system has another client, like mobile app? Or what if you have more than one API server, and several databases (e.g. mongo and redis)? You don't want to put all of them on a single server, do you? By deploying them separately you can benefit from horizontal scaling, i.e. you upgrade your hosting plan on particular server whenever it needs more resources, without affecting another nodes. Divide and rule!
If you still want to deploy React and back-end on the same server, the better place for that would be something like DigitalOcean. On single droplet you can place as many servers as you want and configure them to launch on different ports.
I have created a website on angularJS. I have local server running using nodeJS. Can anyone please tell me the further process to deploy the website.
Your local server is probably only for development purposes.
You can deploy it as usual application. All you need is web server. The most common selection is Apache, nginx or IIS. You can set up one of these on your own (on your own computer/VPS etc.) or use web hosting (just google it...).
Selecting correct solution depends on budget, needed support and number of users. I assume that usual "cheap web hosting" is the best for you.