pub struct State<S>(pub S);Expand description
Extractor for state.
See “Accessing state in middleware” for how to access state in middleware.
With Router
use axum::{Router, routing::get, extract::State};
// the application state
//
// here you can put configuration, database connection pools, or whatever
// state you need
//
// see "When states need to implement `Clone`" for more details on why we need
// `#[derive(Clone)]` here.
#[derive(Clone)]
struct AppState {}
let state = AppState {};
// create a `Router` that holds our state
let app = Router::new()
.route("/", get(handler))
// provide the state so the router can access it
.with_state(state);
async fn handler(
// access the state via the `State` extractor
// extracting a state of the wrong type results in a compile error
State(state): State<AppState>,
) {
// use `state`...
}Note that State is an extractor, so be sure to put it before any body
extractors, see “the order of extractors”.
Combining stateful routers
Multiple Routers can be combined with Router::nest or Router::merge
When combining Routers with one of these methods, the Routers must have
the same state type. Generally, this can be inferred automatically:
use axum::{Router, routing::get, extract::State};
#[derive(Clone)]
struct AppState {}
let state = AppState {};
// create a `Router` that will be nested within another
let api = Router::new()
.route("/posts", get(posts_handler));
let app = Router::new()
.nest("/api", api)
.with_state(state);
async fn posts_handler(State(state): State<AppState>) {
// use `state`...
}However, if you are composing Routers that are defined in separate scopes,
you may need to annotate the State type explicitly:
use axum::{Router, routing::get, extract::State};
#[derive(Clone)]
struct AppState {}
fn make_app() -> Router {
let state = AppState {};
Router::new()
.nest("/api", make_api())
.with_state(state) // the outer Router's state is inferred
}
// the inner Router must specify its state type to compose with the
// outer router
fn make_api() -> Router<AppState> {
Router::new()
.route("/posts", get(posts_handler))
}
async fn posts_handler(State(state): State<AppState>) {
// use `state`...
}In short, a Router’s generic state type defaults to ()
(no state) unless Router::with_state is called or the value
of the generic type is given explicitly.
With MethodRouter
use axum::{routing::get, extract::State};
#[derive(Clone)]
struct AppState {}
let state = AppState {};
let method_router_with_state = get(handler)
// provide the state so the handler can access it
.with_state(state);
async fn handler(State(state): State<AppState>) {
// use `state`...
}With Handler
use axum::{routing::get, handler::Handler, extract::State};
#[derive(Clone)]
struct AppState {}
let state = AppState {};
async fn handler(State(state): State<AppState>) {
// use `state`...
}
// provide the state so the handler can access it
let handler_with_state = handler.with_state(state);
axum::Server::bind(&"0.0.0.0:3000".parse().unwrap())
.serve(handler_with_state.into_make_service())
.await
.expect("server failed");Substates
State only allows a single state type but you can use FromRef to extract “substates”:
use axum::{Router, routing::get, extract::{State, FromRef}};
// the application state
#[derive(Clone)]
struct AppState {
// that holds some api specific state
api_state: ApiState,
}
// the api specific state
#[derive(Clone)]
struct ApiState {}
// support converting an `AppState` in an `ApiState`
impl FromRef<AppState> for ApiState {
fn from_ref(app_state: &AppState) -> ApiState {
app_state.api_state.clone()
}
}
let state = AppState {
api_state: ApiState {},
};
let app = Router::new()
.route("/", get(handler))
.route("/api/users", get(api_users))
.with_state(state);
async fn api_users(
// access the api specific state
State(api_state): State<ApiState>,
) {
}
async fn handler(
// we can still access to top level state
State(state): State<AppState>,
) {
}For convenience FromRef can also be derived using #[derive(FromRef)].
For library authors
If you’re writing a library that has an extractor that needs state, this is the recommended way to do it:
use axum_core::extract::{FromRequestParts, FromRef};
use http::request::Parts;
use async_trait::async_trait;
use std::convert::Infallible;
// the extractor your library provides
struct MyLibraryExtractor;
#[async_trait]
impl<S> FromRequestParts<S> for MyLibraryExtractor
where
// keep `S` generic but require that it can produce a `MyLibraryState`
// this means users will have to implement `FromRef<UserState> for MyLibraryState`
MyLibraryState: FromRef<S>,
S: Send + Sync,
{
type Rejection = Infallible;
async fn from_request_parts(parts: &mut Parts, state: &S) -> Result<Self, Self::Rejection> {
// get a `MyLibraryState` from a reference to the state
let state = MyLibraryState::from_ref(state);
// ...
}
}
// the state your library needs
struct MyLibraryState {
// ...
}When states need to implement Clone
Your top level state type must implement Clone to be extractable with State:
use axum::extract::State;
// no substates, so to extract to `State<AppState>` we must implement `Clone` for `AppState`
#[derive(Clone)]
struct AppState {}
async fn handler(State(state): State<AppState>) {
// ...
}This works because of impl<S> FromRef<S> for S where S: Clone.
This is also true if you’re extracting substates, unless you never extract the top level state itself:
use axum::extract::{State, FromRef};
// we never extract `State<AppState>`, just `State<InnerState>`. So `AppState` doesn't need to
// implement `Clone`
struct AppState {
inner: InnerState,
}
#[derive(Clone)]
struct InnerState {}
impl FromRef<AppState> for InnerState {
fn from_ref(app_state: &AppState) -> InnerState {
app_state.inner.clone()
}
}
async fn api_users(State(inner): State<InnerState>) {
// ...
}In general however we recommend you implement Clone for all your state types to avoid
potential type errors.
Shared mutable state
As state is global within a Router you can’t directly get a mutable reference to
the state.
The most basic solution is to use an Arc<Mutex<_>>. Which kind of mutex you need depends on
your use case. See the tokio docs for more details.
Note that holding a locked std::sync::Mutex across .await points will result in !Send
futures which are incompatible with axum. If you need to hold a mutex across .await points,
consider using a tokio::sync::Mutex instead.
Example
use axum::{Router, routing::get, extract::State};
use std::sync::{Arc, Mutex};
#[derive(Clone)]
struct AppState {
data: Arc<Mutex<String>>,
}
async fn handler(State(state): State<AppState>) {
let mut data = state.data.lock().expect("mutex was poisoned");
*data = "updated foo".to_owned();
// ...
}
let state = AppState {
data: Arc::new(Mutex::new("foo".to_owned())),
};
let app = Router::new()
.route("/", get(handler))
.with_state(state);Tuple Fields§
§0: S