On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Doug Ballance <dball...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think anyone will be able to give you a good evaluation > without knowing more about the requests. Django itself could probably > handle 10k requests per second returning a simple "hello world" > response, or less than 10 if you are returning very large/difficult to > generate responses. It is what your app does that is going to make > all the difference. > Sure, I'm willing to share more info, as long as people are interested and ready to discuss. Just need some more traction on the thread to keep the discussion alive. With that in mind, how should we measure response complexity? Any particular parameter, scale? Probably I can measure against that, and share the numbers to shed more light on how many requests can be handled in with a particular hardware config. Any suggestion on how to load test/performance test django server installation? (Comparing performance with some high-traffic sites, and scaling application upto or better level is always desired :) ) > > The djangobook.com site has some good info on scaling, despite being > for a much older version of django. Ignore the code, and skip down > the the section on scaling: > http://www.djangobook.com/en/1.0/chapter20/ Yeah. I'm very much aware of this. But what I always feel is, this section is missing out on some numbers, to show how much the different setups perform on similar hardware. Right now, I myself am using the single server setup, as mentioned before. > > > From my own experience, caching/memcache can make all the difference > in the world. Find out what is taking the time, and cache it. > Different approaches to your page design can help too. If the page is > 95% identical for all users, cache the 95% and pull in the 5% with > javascript to personalize. Allowing something like varnish to sit in > front of those expensive to generate, but cachable pages is another > way to speed things up but it requires a bit of application specific > configuration to be useful (ignoring cookies for certain urls, making > sure you are setting the vary header correctly in your app, etc). > Memcache, etc. all in place. And we're still improving things as much as we can. Haven't really tried varnish till now, but will surely try it as well. As for most of the other queries, they're still quite open. Starting with the most important one: > Got around .1 millions requests and around 200+ requests/sec max. Is this good, bad, or at par? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django users" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. > > -- Thanks, Subhranath Chunder. www.subhranath.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
