convore.json/groups/python-deployment-and-hosting/what-is-your-favorite-wsgi-server-and-why-uwsgi-gunicorn-cherrypy-etc/messages.json

[{"user_id": 1736, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299181809.9991031, "message": "I still use mod_wsgi mostly out of habit and because I haven't had any problems that would make me want to change. gunicorn is probably my next choice out of those though.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 262920}, {"user_id": 13340, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299181731.834275, "message": "To seed the conversation, here's a blog post benchmarking the various WSGI servers: http://nichol.as/benchmark-of-python-web-servers", "group_id": 5283, "id": 262904}, {"user_id": 16551, "stars": [{"date_created": 1299190507.6039381, "user_id": 1736}, {"date_created": 1299207837.301749, "user_id": 214}, {"date_created": 1299420344.234623, "user_id": 5778}], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299186623.9541271, "message": "@natea I really wish people would stop referring to that benchmark. It needs a big warning label on it saying 'you would never actually use this Apache configuration in practice but we will use it anyway because it supports the falsehood that Apache is bloated'.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 263696}, {"user_id": 214, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299207990.7314799, "message": "I mostly use mod_wsgi. Recently tried gunicorn for a deployment and its fine too, but not particularly better in any way that I've noticed.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266186}, {"user_id": 1, "stars": [{"date_created": 1301899461.7570021, "user_id": 26925}], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299210919.3339739, "message": "That's the thing, like @carljm none are unbelievably better than the other. People try to show benchmarks, or tout features, but at the end of the day it mostly comes down to aesthetic/personal preference IMO.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266370}, {"user_id": 16551, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299212840.9367249, "message": "@ericflo Spot on and what I even say to people. Just use that which you feel easier to install/setup/manage. Am always happy though to get feedback on how to make mod_wsgi better. :-)", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266579}, {"user_id": 16551, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299212942.0807481, "message": "@ericflo BTW, I am still curious as to what you use for main WSGI server in Convore. Don't think I have ever seen it stated.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266592}, {"user_id": 1736, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299214783.2168701, "message": "@GrahamDumpleton I always just paste the big snippet from the mod_wsgi docs at the top of every .wsgi file, but it gets old and seems like it could be made Easy (tm)", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266716}, {"user_id": 1736, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299214735.709193, "message": "@GrahamDumpleton WsgiVirtualenv config option please!", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266707}, {"user_id": 1, "stars": [{"date_created": 1299420470.0962219, "user_id": 5778}], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299218279.464051, "message": "@GrahamDumpleton We're using eventlet's built-in wsgi stuff http://eventlet.net/doc/modules/wsgi.html We only started using it since we were doing some stuff with Eventlet, and wanted something simple. Now we're just sticking with it because it's not broken :)", "group_id": 5283, "id": 267060}, {"user_id": 1736, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299215452.5582659, "message": "@GrahamDumpleton Adding in static files via an Alias isn't hard enough to me that I worry about simplifying it, but I'm all in favor for the rest! :-D", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266789}, {"user_id": 16551, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299215112.8991399, "message": "@coderanger I have been looking at a new directive WSGIProjectAlias which would point at a complete virtualenv. In doing this it would look first for static resources in a 'htdocs' directory of virtualenv and if there isn't one which matches, then would fallback to having primary WSGI application setup in virtualenv handling the request. In doing this, would ensure all paths for virtualenv for that WSGI application setup in advance. So, one line of config to handle virtualenv, WSGI and static file serving.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266765}, {"user_id": 16551, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299216290.024488, "message": "@coderanger You have control of the Apache configuration though. Imagine someone who hasn't. They may not be able to go back to admins to get them to keep adding any special Alias directives. What I have in mind gives not root user lots more control to put up static files where they need, including stuff like favicon and robots files. Anyway, will be a while before I get to implementing it.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 266869}, {"user_id": 214, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299258122.221808, "message": "@GrahamDumpleton Also, I'd prefer to see it generalized to a WsgiPrimarySiteDir type directive (that would pretty much just call site.addsitedir and do the path rearranging to make it take priority over other paths), so it wouldn't be tied to the specific layout of a virtualenv.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 271253}, {"user_id": 214, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299258054.714416, "message": "@GrahamDumpleton Like @coderanger, I hope the virtualenv-handling could be split from the static-handling. I usually don't serve static files via the same Apache instance (or Apache at all) and wouldn't want the overhead of Apache checking for static files that will never exist.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 271233}, {"user_id": 1, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299259495.35568, "message": "err @carljm, stupid Android", "group_id": 5283, "id": 271425}, {"user_id": 1, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299259459.6138861, "message": "Oh that would be really neat @calm (path handling)", "group_id": 5283, "id": 271423}, {"user_id": 1736, "stars": [{"date_created": 1299261840.9847789, "user_id": 214}, {"date_created": 1299263275.769737, "user_id": 1}, {"date_created": 1299420537.0442741, "user_id": 5778}], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299261315.778461, "message": "@carljm I'm less worried about overhead, more I don't want the virtualenv config option to imply any particular URL layout (like camping /static or assuming my favicon is a static file).", "group_id": 5283, "id": 271603}, {"user_id": 20261, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1299818151.259371, "message": "For io bound apps, we've found gevent's libevent based wsgi server to be super fast and stable under load.  It also proved relatively easy to had support for things like graceful restarts.  On the downside  we had to patch libevent to fix a few bugs though which makes setup a bit more complex.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 319324}, {"user_id": 19441, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1300990771.397109, "message": "Right now I'm playing with gunicorn and so far I like it a lot because of it's simplicity in terms of configuration.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 429326}, {"user_id": 12133, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1300995779.3239069, "message": "uwsgi", "group_id": 5283, "id": 430275}, {"user_id": 22943, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1301874259.954329, "message": "Gunicorn no doubt", "group_id": 5283, "id": 518785}, {"user_id": 24931, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1302051330.832674, "message": "@whitmo, have you used gunicorn with the gevent based worker (http://gunicorn.org/design.html#async-workers) ?", "group_id": 5283, "id": 551481}, {"user_id": 9896, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1302089823.801544, "message": "gunicorn + supervisord + nginx, just because reloading/debugging gunicorn is easier in my opinion than mod_wsgi, don't really care about those benchmarks.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 557921}, {"user_id": 16551, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1302090093.2403779, "message": "@ojiidotch Have you read http://code.google.com/p/modwsgi/wiki/ReloadingSourceCode for all the different reloading capabilities.", "group_id": 5283, "id": 557937}, {"user_id": 9896, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1302090224.906996, "message": "@GrahamDumpleton, yes of course. I'm not saying it's not possible. I just don't like the idea of `touch somefile` means restarting a server. `sudo supervisorctl restart my-process` makes a lot more sense to me ;-)", "group_id": 5283, "id": 557949}, {"user_id": 24370, "stars": [], "topic_id": 9633, "date_created": 1302109814.667743, "message": "i second ojiidotch. ease of use is a huge plus for gunicorn", "group_id": 5283, "id": 561596}]