On Jul 4, 11:20 pm, Gábor Farkas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jeremy Dunck wrote: > >> Frankly I think a generic python application server similar to tomcat > >> would do a world of good for python apps in general. Something similar to > >> cherrypy... but this is beyond the responsibilities of the django community > >> which have plenty great work left. > > > Similar to CherryPy but not it? How come? In any case, if you're > > thinking this way, consider Aspen/Stephane: > >http://www.zetadev.com/software/aspen/ > > > It appears to be thread-per-request. > > so all the usual issues (and non-issues) with the python GIL apply... > > btw. i never understood what's so nice about those pure-python (or > pure-ruby (mongrel etc.)) web-servers.. > > for example regarding performance/memory-consumption/whatever, > > why should apache+mod_pythonbe worse than a pure-python-web-server? > > let's say with the single-process multi-threaded apache-mode...?
It may be of interest for you to read my recent blog post at: http://blog.dscpl.com.au/2007/07/web-hosting-landscape-and-modwsgi.html This talks about mod_wsgi, but various of the issues discussed there with running mod_wsgi in embedded mode apply equally to mod_python. Some of the things discussed are the balance between performance vs security, memory usage, scaling ability of Apache and what impacts the GIL has on performance when using multiple processors. Also ensure you read comments as some discussion on trade offs between mod_wsgi and mod_fastcgi or proxy like solutions. Graham --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
