I am working on a Ruby on Rails app that communicates with RackSpace cloudfiles (similar to Amazon S3 but lacking some features).
Due to the lack of the availability of per-object access permissions and query string authentication, downloads to users have to be mediated through an application.
In Rails 2.3, it looks like you can dynamically build a response as follows:
# Streams about 180 MB of generated data to the browser.
render :text => proc { |response, output|
10_000_000.times do |i|
output.write("This is line #{i}\n")
end
}
(from http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActionController/Base.html#M000464)
Instead of 10_000_000.times...
I could dump my cloudfiles stream generation code in there.
Trouble is, this is the output I get when I attempt to use this technique in Rails 3.
#<Proc:0x000000010989a6e8@/Users/jderiksen/lt/lt-uber/site/app/controllers/prospect_uploads_controller.rb:75>
Looks like maybe the proc object's call
method is not being called? Any other ideas?
It looks like this isn't available in Rails 3
https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/2546-render-text-proc
This appeared to work for me in my controller:
Assign to
response_body
an object that responds to#each
:If you are using 1.9.x or the Backports gem, you can write this more compactly using
Enumerator.new
:Note that when and if the data is flushed depends on the Rack handler and underlying server being used. I have confirmed that Mongrel, for instance, will stream the data, but other users have reported that WEBrick, for instance, buffers it until the response is closed. There is no way to force the response to flush.
In Rails 3.0.x, there are several additional gotchas:
A bug in the interaction between Rack and Rails causes
#each
to be called twice for each request. This is another open bug. You can work around it with the following monkey patch:Both problems are fixed in Rails 3.1, where HTTP streaming is a marquee feature.
Note that the other common suggestion,
self.response_body = proc {|response, output| ...}
, does work in Rails 3.0.x, but has been deprecated (and will no longer actually stream the data) in 3.1. Assigning an object that responds to#each
works in all Rails 3 versions.Thanks to all the posts above, here is fully working code to stream large CSVs. This code:
Controller Method:
config/unicorn.rb
Model.rb
In case you are assigning to response_body an object that responds to #each method and it's buffering until the response is closed, try in in action controller:
self.response.headers['Last-Modified'] = Time.now.to_s
Just for the record, rails >= 3.1 has an easy way to stream data by assigning an object that respond to #each method to the controller's response.
Everything is explained here: http://blog.sparqcode.com/2012/02/04/streaming-data-with-rails-3-1-or-3-2/
Yes, response_body is the Rails 3 way of doing this for the moment: https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/4554-render-text-proc-regression
This solved my problem as well - I have gzip'd CSV files, want to send to the user as unzipped CSV, so I read them a line at a time using a GzipReader.
These lines are also helpful if you're trying to deliver a big file as a download:
self.response.headers["Content-Type"] = "application/octet-stream" self.response.headers["Content-Disposition"] = "attachment; filename=#{filename}"
In addition, you will have to set the 'Content-Length' header by your self.
If not, Rack will have to wait (buffering body data into memory) to determine the length. And it will ruin your efforts using the methods described above.
In my case, I could determine the length. In cases you can't, you need to make Rack to start sending body without a 'Content-Length' header. Try to add into config.ru "use Rack::Chunked" after 'require' before the 'run'. (Thanks arkadiy)
I commented in the lighthouse ticket, just wanted to say the self.response_body = proc approach worked for me though I needed to use Mongrel instead of WEBrick to succeed.
Martin
Applying John's solution along with Exequiel's suggestion worked for me.
The statement
marks the response as non-cacheable in rack.
After investigating further, I figured one could also use this :
This, to me, is just slightly more intuitive. It conveys the message to any1 else who may be reading my code. Also, in case a future version of rack stops checking for Last-Modified , a lot of code may break and it may be a while for folks to figure out why.