Hi Mandar, I have tried pythonanywhere. You are right that they are slow. They have been having some problems (there is a post on the forums related to that), which they are fixing. It appears they are also going to move from Apache to nginx server. I hope speeds improve once they have fixed the issues, since their customer service is first class and their prices are better than other hosts.
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 12:43 AM, Mandar Vaze <mandarv...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have been using pythonanywhere last few days (Free account for testing > purposes) > Deployment is easy - They have a big "deploy web2py app" button :) > They give you access to bash/mysql console via browser - Very nice. Paid > accounts get native ssh access too. > Their response time for support queries also has been decent. > > Only problem - it seems slow. I say "seems" because I have no benchmark > numbers. Since I'm new to web2py - it maybe problem with how i've coded my > app. > > Anyone else using pythonanywhere ? Especially "paid" account ? Would you > recommend it for "long term" and/or production deployment ? > > -Mandar > > > On Sunday, August 5, 2012 11:26:00 PM UTC+5:30, curiouslearn wrote: >> >> Thanks for sharing that Spiffytech. >> >> I think it would be helpful to new users like me if on web2py page we >> collect information on which are good hosts and easy instructions on >> how to deploy web2py on these hosts. >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 12:04 AM, spiffytech <spiff...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Tonight I threw up a copy of my personal site, just to see if AppFog is >> > worth looking into. Perhaps my experience would have been better if I >> > tried >> > during business hours while their live chat support was open, but I >> > don't >> > plan to use AppFog after this experience. >> > >> > The highlights: >> > >> > They advertise unlimited apps, but you're limited by how many apps you >> > can >> > squeeze into the RAM your account gets. Sure, you don't have the hard >> > cap of >> > 10 apps like App Engine (still?) gives you, but "unlimited" isn't really >> > true >> > AppFog's founder wants you to believe they're proving PaaS doesn't have >> > to >> > be slow and expensive, but I found AppFog to be slow, and their pricing >> > gets >> > nutty-expensive very fast >> > Getting my app working at all was a trying experience, and AppFog >> > doesn't >> > offer much in the way of documentation or debug output to help you >> > No sign of a cron system, so you'll be relying on web2py's built-in cron >> > (didn't check if it works there, but I assume so) >> > All apps have a 100MB disk limit, and I don't see a way to buy more. >> > Better >> > hope you're apps don't get very big! >> > You do have a writable filesystem, for what that's worth with the 100MB >> > disk >> > use limit. I didn't check whether all instances access the same FS >> > (that's >> > kind of an important way so design the service) >> > >> > My conclusion: If you want a free place to host something that (really, >> > really) doesn't need to be performant, AppFog is a decent choice >> > because: >> > >> > It has a writable filesystem, which sets it apart from App Engine >> > It has MySQL, which sets it apart from App Engine >> > It looks more likely to stick around than some of the other free web >> > host >> > services that I've seen mentioned here >> > >> > However, to get that free hosting you'll have to put up with terrible >> > performance (or highly variable performance if it magically speeds up by >> > tomorrow morning), poor documentation, and a tricky and opaque setup >> > procedure. >> > >> > On to doing stuff, and statistics! >> > >> > First off, I could not find any links on their site instructing me on >> > how to >> > configure a Python app to work on AppFog. I eventually gave up and >> > resorted >> > to Googling for a tutorial, which led me to this section in AppFog's >> > docs. >> > Not sure how you are supposed to find that. >> > >> > That link isn't too helpful, though- it shows how to make a Flask site >> > that >> > works on AppFog, and links to working Bottle and Django sites, but >> > doesn't >> > spell out how to make a generic WSGI site work. To make my simple web2py >> > site work, I had to do the following: >> > >> > mv wsgihandler.py wsgi.py # AppFog needs wsgi.py. I tried a symlink >> > instead >> > of a move, but couldn't make AppFog work in that arrangement >> > ln -s wsgi.py wsgihandler.py # This ensures updates to web2py affect >> > your >> > wsgi.py >> > gem install af >> > af login >> > af push <appname> # This gives you an Amazon East app. I can't figure >> > out >> > how to use `af` to deploy to a different infrastructure >> > >> > I tried creating an app on the Rackspace infrastructure through AppFog's >> > web >> > admin `af update <appname>`, but couldn't get my app to start. It didn't >> > start automatically, and `af start <appname> --debug` tells me I don't >> > have >> > the "run" mode available. So no Rackspace for me. >> > >> > Once I got my app running on AppFog's Amazon EC2 infrastructure (after a >> > number of false starts related to not having wsgi.py) I noticed my app >> > ran >> > very slowly. The front page of my app doesn't really do anything; it >> > could >> > almost be a static HTML file, yet it was unbearably slow on AppFog. >> > >> > I fired up Apache Benchmark and got some very disappointing results. >> > With a >> > concurrency of 50, run for 30 seconds: >> > >> > 1 instance, 128MB RAM: 139 requests completed, mean average of 10.5 >> > seconds >> > to fulfill a request >> > 1 instance, 2GB RAM: 140 requests, 10.8 seconds mean >> > 15 instances, 128MB RAM each: 163 requests, 9.2 seconds mean >> > >> > For comparison, my site hosted on its usual low-end rackmount server >> > (RHEL >> > 6.2, 3.1GHz quad-core Xeon, 8GB RAM, Apache with mod_wsgi) completed >> > 3061 >> > requests with a mean 0.490 seconds per request. Beefier than what AppFog >> > gave me? Sure, but not enough to explain handling 22x the requests, with >> > 1/22nd the response time. >> > >> > * The AppFog mean request fulfillment numbers varied by as much as two >> > seconds over the several times I ran the tests. That sort of >> > unpredictability worries me. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thursday, July 26, 2012 9:50:01 PM UTC-4, Joel Carrier wrote: >> >> >> >> Has anyone tried running web2py on appfog ( www.appfog.com ) and cares >> >> to >> >> comment on their experience? >> > >> > -- >> > >> > >> > > > -- > > > --
