django-heroku VS psycopg2

Surprised nobody here has mentioned WhiteNoise yet. Use the django-heroku package and WhiteNoise and you can serve all your static files directly from Heroku, no need for S3. It's pretty much magic, just follow the installation instructions for django-heroku, it has WhiteNoise as a dependency. If you want better performance then stick a CDN like CloudFlare in front and it will take care of caching all the static files. Heroku themselves recommend using WhiteNoise, the django-heroku package just does all the config for you.

django-heroku: We have to Configure Django app for Heroku. This lib provides settings, logging and test runner configurations.

But I'm not sure the python version is the issue here. This issue looks similar to yours: https://github.com/heroku/django-heroku/issues/39

And Its from Heroku Docs, and last maintained 3 years ago..

You should probably avoid using the Django-Heroku package at this point. The last substantive code commit is nearing three years ago. So I would try removing the django_heroku.settings(locals()) line. You would also need to insert new settings to use PostgreSQL as your database. On Heroku, this is best accomplished with [dj-database-url](https://github.com/jacobian/dj-database-url), which was a dependency of Django-Heroku but is still updated. There are many ways to set it up, but I typically use:

I find it very peculiar that Heroku's own documentation suggest using django-heroku although the repository is in archive mode.

You can practice both by using https://www.psycopg.org from your Python code to communicate with your database. When I wanted to practice some SQL, that's what I did (we use psycopg at work, so that's what I practiced with, making a dream journal thingy for myself that was better than just noting stuff in a notepad because I could then look up e.g. what other stuff was correlated with Y, how many times I dreamed of X, etc. etc.)

But seems like it should work with Django 3, which you have specified https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2/issues/1293

If you're using Postgres for your SQL, look at the "copy' method of the psycopg module (see https://www.psycopg.org/articles/2020/11/15/psycopg3-copy/) . It's much faster than INSERTs in my experience (YMMV).

Back when I used Psycopg2, there was no -binary package, so you'd get libpq set up similarly to pg-native. Docs say:

> The binary package is a practical choice for development and testing but in production it is advised to use the package built from sources.

Relevant GitHub discussion: https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2/issues/674

I dunno, this seems worse to me.

Just go to the more easily readable docs here. I’m sorry, but the linked article is terrible.

psycopg2-binary. See https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2/issues/1286.

psycopg2-binary, PostgreSQL Database adapter for python.

... # psycopg2==2.9.3 # https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg2 ...

I sometimes do this in testing. For example, consider the library used to communicate with a Postgres database, psycopg.