Ray wrote: > Yes, but this is more of a web application though--something that I've > never developed in Python before, so... I'll be evaluating Django > shortly--let me see how it compares to Tomcat.
Performance is one of the key features of Django. For example, I'm using Django at washingtonpost.com for the U.S. Congress Votes Database, which has more than 4 million records and is linked-to from the washingtonpost.com home page whenever there's a key congressional vote. (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/) The server doesn't break a sweat, thanks to Django's very-convenient-and-powerful cache system: http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/cache/ Also, the developers at grono.net, a Polish social networking site with more than half a million users, have converted various bits of their Java code to Python/Django. They've found that Django is not only much quicker (and more fun) to develop in, it's also *faster* than Java and requires less hardware. E-mail me personally if you want their contact information for direct testimonials; we'll be publishing some more testimonials publically as we get closer to Django 1.0. I would never use TurboGears or Ruby on Rails over Django for any performance-intensive Web app. In my opinion, both frameworks make some poor design decisions regarding the importance of performance. Adrian -- Adrian Holovaty holovaty.com | chicagocrime.org | djangoproject.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
