Rudy Lattae wrote:
> * Have you used Cherokee with Django?
I swapped a VPS a few months back from Apache + mod_python to lighttpd
(FCGI) then to nginx then to Cherokee (SCGI)... I got somewhat
frustrated with configuration editing and ugly/useless wiki
documentation, so ultimately the deciding
Folks, I think we should bring this back to the actual question and
not derail the thread and ram it head first into the FUD vs FUD
mountain. hcarvalhoalves original question was (and still remains):
"I wanted to know if someone here on the list is using or used
Cherokee
with Django, if there's a
>
> To stick with your analogy, it actually *is* like buying a car and being
> surprised you don't get 0-60 in 5 seconds and 80 mpg, but only because
> you will only drive it in second gear. And then you blame the dealer..
>
Sure. Cherokee's an automatic ;p
> >From the way you talk about Apache,
On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 16:23 +0100, Oli Warner wrote:
> FUD. You just think it is slow and inefficient because you
> have never
> configured it correctly.
>
> Analogy time. Gather round, children.
>
> You buy a car. The dealer said it can do 0 to 60mph in five seconds
> an
>
> FUD. You just think it is slow and inefficient because you have never
> configured it correctly.
>
Analogy time. Gather round, children.
You buy a car. The dealer said it can do 0 to 60mph in five seconds and does
80 miles per gallon. You buy it for these reasons but when you receive it
and t
On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 23:54 +0100, Oli Warner wrote:
> People quite happily run Django on memory starved VPS systems
> using
> Apache/mod_wsgi with optional nginx front end for static
> files.
>
> Apache is woefully slow and inefficient at static serving. A static
>
> People quite happily run Django on memory starved VPS systems using
> Apache/mod_wsgi *with optional nginx front end* for static files.
>
Apache is woefully slow and inefficient at static serving. A static reverse
proxy is not optional for sane people.
And I'd rather just admin one server.
-
On Oct 8, 9:38 am, Oli Warner wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 5:34 AM, hcarvalhoalves
> wrote:
>
> > I wanted to know if someone here on the list is using or used Cherokee
> > with Django, if there's any performance improvements over Apache +
> > mod_wsgi/mod_python (specially for concurrent r
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 5:34 AM, hcarvalhoalves wrote:
> I wanted to know if someone here on the list is using or used Cherokee
> with Django, if there's any performance improvements over Apache +
> mod_wsgi/mod_python (specially for concurrent requests), and if there
> are any gotchas with Django
> Thanks for the advice, but I already know how to optimize django apps
> (documentation covers this well), so I'm not seeking advice on this.
> Neither I'm willing to use Cherokee so I get a magic performance boost
> for my app alone (while it is indeed faster than Apache for serving
> static con
Thanks for the advice, but I already know how to optimize django apps
(documentation covers this well), so I'm not seeking advice on this.
Neither I'm willing to use Cherokee so I get a magic performance boost
for my app alone (while it is indeed faster than Apache for serving
static content).
In
On Oct 7, 3:34 pm, hcarvalhoalves wrote:
> I recently found this web server (http://www.cherokee-project.com/)
> that claims to be "the fastest web server". I'm not sure that holds
> true for *CGI, but at least for static content they have some
> impressive benchmarks. Despite the claimings, it
I recently found this web server (http://www.cherokee-project.com/)
that claims to be "the fastest web server". I'm not sure that holds
true for *CGI, but at least for static content they have some
impressive benchmarks. Despite the claimings, it's an interesting
alternative for what it supports o
13 matches
Mail list logo
