apache isn't fine for static files either. The "move" to evented-like webservers of practically all tech-savvy peoples in the need is a good estimate on how much the uber-standard apache lacks in easy-to-debug scenario (I won't even start with the know-how of the syntax to make it work as you'd like). It grew big with cgi, php and java and practically every shared hosting out there "back in the days" where no alternatives were available. It shows all of its age ^__^
BTW: nginx doesn't run python as apache does. Usually you have something to manage python processes (gunicorn or uwsgi) and nginx just buffers in/out requests (and being "evented-like" is a perfect candidate). On Tuesday, March 18, 2014 7:21:29 AM UTC+1, Massimo Di Pierro wrote: > > People have found lots of variability in performance with apache+mod_wsgi. > Performance is very sensitive to memeory/etc. > > This is because Apache is not async (like nginx) and it either uses > threads or processes. Both have issues with Python. Threads slow you down > because of the GIL. Parallel processes may consume lots of memory which may > also cause performance issues. Things get worse and worse if processes hand > (think of clients sending requests but not loading because of slow > connections). > > Apache is fine for static files. gunicorn and nginx are known to have much > better performance with Pyhton web apps. > > Massimo > > -- Resources: - http://web2py.com - http://web2py.com/book (Documentation) - http://github.com/web2py/web2py (Source code) - https://code.google.com/p/web2py/issues/list (Report Issues) --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
