On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 5:02 PM, cd34 mcd...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 27, 10:00 pm, Terry Schmitt tschm...@schmittworks.com wrote:
Like Weixi Yen, my preference is the simplicity of using reverse proxy
with Nginx. I've used this in the past for Java based apps. It's fast,
easy to configure and
On May 7, 12:53 pm, Mike Orr sluggos...@gmail.com wrote:
The CherryPy server also works with Pylons and is supposed to have
better performance than PasteHTTPServer. There should be an INI
configuration in the Pylons wiki or list archive.
I'm reasonably happy with apache2-mpm-worker/mod_wsgi or
I'm of this school of thought:
if you're doing anything with moderate to high traffic, you should be
running NGINX on port 80 , with a proxypass to something else.
What you proxypass to, however, is up to you.
1- paster
2- wsgi
3- apache
the important thing is to get Apache off of port 80 , its
On May 7, 2:06 am, Jonathan Vanasco jonat...@findmeon.com wrote:
I'm of this school of thought:
if you're doing anything with moderate to high traffic, you should be
running NGINX on port 80 , with a proxypass to something else.
What you proxypass to, however, is up to you.
1- paster
2-
On 28 Apr., 03:29, Thomas G. Willis tom.wil...@gmail.com wrote:
I am pretty sure you can do those things with apache too :) . I was
under the impression that nginx is easier to setup and faster/lighter
weight for things specific to web applications.
My experience has been that apache
On Apr 27, 10:00 pm, Terry Schmitt tschm...@schmittworks.com wrote:
Like Weixi Yen, my preference is the simplicity of using reverse proxy
with Nginx. I've used this in the past for Java based apps. It's fast,
easy to configure and I will probably use that as my first choice as I
venture into
On Apr 28, 8:55 pm, Haron Media i...@haronmedia.com wrote:
While paster is great for development, at least in simple benchmarking
I was never able to get it to go reliably beyond a few hundred
concurrent connections.
Per how many processes / threads / paste instances (and on what
I actually did a ton of research before creating my pylons app, and the
answers I got were more or less to use nginx as a reverse proxy to paster
server.
This is the setup I'm using currently for my main application.
You don't have to change anything in your production.ini file. You just
need
Thanks, but what bennifit will we get by reverce proxy with nginx?
Isn't there a way like apache uses mod_python?
Happy hacking.
Krishnakant.
On Tuesday 27 April 2010 11:36 PM, Weixi Yen wrote:
I actually did a ton of research before creating my pylons app, and
the answers I got were more or
I've been using nginx with uwsgi: http://projects.unbit.it/uwsgi/ as
documented here:
http://tonylandis.com/python/deployment-howt-pylons-nginx-and-uwsgi/
I had problems using using 0.9.5.rc1, but, 0.9.4.4 worked fine.
I would not recommend nginx's mod_wsgi as it has problems with
blocking
Krishnakant,
I can't speak to the best method with Pylons, as I'm just learning
Python and Pylons, but to me, the main benefit of using Nginx and
reverse proxy is:
1. You can load balance between several instances of your pylons app.
2. Nginx can serve all your static content for you, which
I am pretty sure you can do those things with apache too :) . I was
under the impression that nginx is easier to setup and faster/lighter
weight for things specific to web applications.
My experience has been that apache configs don't fit my brain all that
well, whereas I found nginx
cd34,
Thanks for that link about mod_wsgi. Very informative.
Like Weixi Yen, my preference is the simplicity of using reverse proxy
with Nginx. I've used this in the past for Java based apps. It's fast,
easy to configure and I will probably use that as my first choice as I
venture into the Python
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Jonathan Vanasco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 23, 3:48 pm, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is quite interesting. I've been looking for a way to build a
site scraper (something analogous to an aggregator but more
site-specific) that could eventually
On May 24, 5:10 am, Shannon -jj Behrens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bob Ippolito was telling me once that he took a server in Twisted and
rewrote it in stackless. He got some performance gains, but then he
rewrote it in Erlang. It dropped from 40% CPU utilization to almost
nothing, and it was
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Shannon -jj Behrens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone tried out the mod_wsgi module for *Nginx*? Yeah, I know,
weird: http://wiki.codemongers.com/NginxNgxWSGIModule
I personally know the author and I definitely recommend it. He's
focused and competent.
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Shannon -jj Behrens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I personally know the author and I definitely recommend it. He's
focused and competent.
Oh, cool!
He also gave a talk about nginx's mod_wsgi at the PyCon Italy
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:32 AM, Lawrence Oluyede [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Shannon -jj Behrens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Has anyone tried out the mod_wsgi module for *Nginx*? Yeah, I know,
weird: http://wiki.codemongers.com/NginxNgxWSGIModule
I
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 12:20:18PM -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 11:55 -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
1) Users of other HTTP servers are always fiddling with them,
restarting after crashes. This may be due to misuse, non-optimal
config - I'm not sure. But I've never had
On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 10:05 -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
I don't think that's such a ridiciulous claim! Consider the
application server that hosts the apps that I write for my company's
internal use. It hosts four or six Pylons applications and one Rails
app. One of these apps handles
Hi
2008/5/22 Shannon -jj Behrens [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Here's my two cents:
Has anyone tried out the mod_wsgi module for *Nginx*? Yeah, I know,
weird: http://wiki.codemongers.com/NginxNgxWSGIModule
But you need run cooperative wsgi app :-(
Twisted's people handle this issue running the
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 8:39 AM, lasizoillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you're interested in doing asynchronous programming in Python but
without the painful callback style approach used by Twisted, check out
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Eventlet. It's based on the same
tricks used by
On May 23, 3:48 pm, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is quite interesting. I've been looking for a way to build a
site scraper (something analogous to an aggregator but more
site-specific) that could eventually become asynchronous, and this
looks a lot easier than Twisted.
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 17:53 -0700, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
On May 22, 5:20 am, Cliff Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this is true for all of us. The difference is that the world
has changed in the last couple of years and now there's more options to
choose from. And by options I
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 00:43 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
If you try to scale a dynamic application and are going to pass part of
the request off to Python on every request you are going to either fail
spectacularly or spend an awful lot of money scaling horizontally.
There's a reason people
Jose Galvez wrote:
Anyone using mod_wsgi with Apache? how good is that for deployment,
better/worse then mod_proxy with paster?
I'm using Apache2 + mod_wsgi 2.0 as a process controller and nginx to
serve static content and proxy dynamic requests to apache2.
Apache2 uses the worker (threaded)
On May 22, 4:20 am, Alberto Valverde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason I use it over paster+supervisord is because I find it *much*
easier to set up and maintain and more powerful (mod_wsgi can be
configured to spawn wsgi applications into separate processes under
their own user/group,
On May 22, 3:43 am, Cliff Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again, I think this contrast is artificial. You are setting up vertical
scaling and horizontal scaling as mutually exclusive when they are
anything but, and unless you have endlessly deep pockets, you should
prefer to control the
One more option I've not seen mentioned is Cherokee:
http://www.cherokee-project.com/
I've never used it in production (last time I experimented with it was a
couple years ago and it wasn't mature enough), but it's reported to be
quite fast, even edging out Nginx in several benchmarks.
Here's my two cents:
Has anyone tried out the mod_wsgi module for *Nginx*? Yeah, I know,
weird: http://wiki.codemongers.com/NginxNgxWSGIModule
Being asynchronous rules! That's why Erlang, Squid, IronPort servers,
Nginx, etc. are able to handle so many concurrent requests so easily.
Here's
On May 20, 9:13 pm, Graham Dumpleton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Also see my comments in other post, but when you say 'proxy' I hope
you don't really mean 'proxy'.
I wrote 'proyxing' when I meant 'pushing'
Let me rephrase...
In my standard setups,
nginx on port 80
maps static content
On May 20, 4:33 pm, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
each, 100,000 requests/day is not that many. That's 4166/hour or
70/minute. Any non-anemic server can do that in its sleep. Our
server has two sites each doing more than that several times a day,
plus three smaller sites.
when you
On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 18:13 -0700, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
If one really has to use a software proxy, then also perhaps look at
dedicated solutions like Pound. It may be the case that nginx serves
okay as a proxy, but it isn't purpose built for that and so solutions
like Pound may provide a
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Jonathan Vanasco
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 20, 4:33 pm, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
each, 100,000 requests/day is not that many. That's 4166/hour or
70/minute. Any non-anemic server can do that in its sleep. Our
server has two sites each
On May 21, 5:25 pm, Cliff Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 18:13 -0700, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
If one really has to use a software proxy, then also perhaps look at
dedicated solutions like Pound. It may be the case that nginx serves
okay as a proxy, but it isn't
On May 21, 4:09 am, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Jonathan Vanasco
Well, for a Pylons site with Postgres that wants to be scalable up
front, a three-server setup makes sense. One for the Pylons app, one
for the static content, and one for the database.
On May 20, 8:48 pm, Graham Dumpleton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Using mod_perl as an indicator is actually a bad idea. This is because
it tends to be the worst of the bunch when it comes to bloating out
Apache. Thus saying that all solutions which embed an interpreter in
Apache are bad based
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 02:01:26PM -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
According to Netcraft, Nginx is now deployed in front of over 1 million
domains. Not nearly as much as Apache, but clearly not all of those are
highly isolated environments. In fact, many sites with heavy traffic
are moving to
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 7:31 AM, Jonathan Vanasco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 21, 4:09 am, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Jonathan Vanasco
Well, for a Pylons site with Postgres that wants to be scalable up
front, a three-server setup makes sense.
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 01:13 -0700, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
On May 21, 5:25 pm, Cliff Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would say however that mod_proxy module in Apache is also purpose
built for proxying, that doesn't mean it is a good idea to use it.
The advantage Nginx brings over even
On May 21, 12:49 pm, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He did say scalable and video, which I took to mean ultra-heavy use of
very large files, and overkill didn't matter. The disk space alone is
one reason why static content might want to be on a separate box, so
it can be plugged into a
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 09:49:32AM -0700, Mike Orr wrote:
So how do you handle writes? You direct them all to one master server
and let it propagate the changes to the slaves? Have you found a good
replicable database among the free ones that work with SQLAlchemy?
Postgres was mentioned;
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 11:55 -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 02:01:26PM -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
According to Netcraft, Nginx is now deployed in front of over 1 million
domains. Not nearly as much as Apache, but clearly not all of those are
highly isolated
Cliff Wells wrote:
Anyway, I think we've gone way OT for long enough. We can continue
offlist if you like.
While it may be off-topic** I want to say I've found the background
discussion from everyone involved (who are all more experienced and
knowledgeable in this area than I am) to be very
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Peter Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cliff Wells wrote:
Anyway, I think we've gone way OT for long enough. We can continue
offlist if you like.
While it may be off-topic** I want to say I've found the background
discussion from everyone involved (who are
On May 21, 6:06 pm, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only noise was about whether Apache is too bloated for its own
good, and whether Nginx is better than everything else. But knowing
what other Pylons sysadmins think of the merits of each is still
worthwhile, even though we don't want
On May 22, 5:20 am, Cliff Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sites that are amongst the largest on the internet fall into a corner
case in my mind. As Mike pointed out, sites have an unrealistic
expectation of traffic. I've been involved in the average cases.
As have I. But I'm going to
There are a few newer servers now (nginx, lighthttpd, cherokee) that
claim to be smaller, more efficient, and better organized than Apache.
Apache is a process/thread based server. Nginx, for example, is a
event-driven server. If you have worked with Twisted, you know that
even-driven code is
I am running on my production server Apache and mod_scgi. Why?
Because when I looked to flup I saw I had the choice between scgi and
fcgi. I tried scgi first and it worked like a charm.
Using Apache was was a natural choice: I still have some php-based
content running on the same server
Ruben
On May 20, 1:33 am, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People say it also has a better knowledge of the quirky
useragents out there and can correct misformed requests better than
just exposing PasteHTTPServer or CherryPy directly, though I don't
know how true it is.
That's pretty much true.
Anyone using mod_wsgi with Apache? how good is that for deployment,
better/worse then mod_proxy with paster?
Jose
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Jonathan Vanasco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On May 20, 1:33 am, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People say it also has a better knowledge of the
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 12:36:11PM -0700, Mike Orr wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Ross Vandegrift [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have considered converting our deployments to mod_python, but only
recently acquired a practical staging environment to test things like
that.
There was
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 09:10:27PM -0700, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
so is Apache considered to be a good thing (through mod_wsgi ,
mod_python , or other ?)
i've been doing mod_perl dev for years, and have had some experience
with mod_python -- generally speaking, my experience is that if you
Jose Galvez wrote:
Anyone using mod_wsgi with Apache? how good is that for deployment,
better/worse then mod_proxy with paster?
Jose
I'm using mod_wsgi with Apache for my personal server. I'm hosting two
pylons projects, trac and my public mercurial repositories (all WSGI
based). Together
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Jonathan Vanasco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've just been running nginx - paster for personal projects
internal dev. We're looking to launch a 100k requests/day min project
here, and I've got a client who I've sold onto Pylons and is looking
at building their
On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 13:49 -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 09:10:27PM -0700, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
so is Apache considered to be a good thing (through mod_wsgi ,
mod_python , or other ?)
i've been doing mod_perl dev for years, and have had some experience
Cliff Wells wrote:
On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 13:49 -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 09:10:27PM -0700, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
so is Apache considered to be a good thing (through mod_wsgi ,
mod_python , or other ?)
i've been doing mod_perl dev for years, and have
On May 21, 1:09 am, Jonathan Vanasco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are going to run a large site which is able to respond well to
bursts in traffic, running Python embedded in Apache running prefork
MPM, with huge amounts of memory in the box is generally the best
approach. This is
El vie, 16-05-2008 a las 13:38 -0700, Jonathan Vanasco escribió:
I'm a little unclear on the better ways to deploy a Pylons app.
My production servers run nginx -- is it better to use some fastcgi
support (if so, how?) or just do a paster serve and proxy to that
port?
apache + mod_wsgi is
what is your platform?
i just tried fcgid on centos 5.1 not long ago, with
mod_fcgid-2.1-3.el5 from epel.repo + apache (version come with
centos2.5) + python 2.4, following this wiki
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 10:43:06AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what is your platform?
i just tried fcgid on centos 5.1 not long ago, with
mod_fcgid-2.1-3.el5 from epel.repo + apache (version come with
centos2.5) + python 2.4, following this wiki
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Ross Vandegrift [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 01:38:24PM -0700, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
I'm a little unclear on the better ways to deploy a Pylons app.
My production servers run nginx -- is it better to use some fastcgi
support (if so,
so is Apache considered to be a good thing (through mod_wsgi ,
mod_python , or other ?)
i've been doing mod_perl dev for years, and have had some experience
with mod_python -- generally speaking, my experience is that if you
can avoid apache you're better off. i guess that's what is throwing
me
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 9:10 PM, Jonathan Vanasco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so is Apache considered to be a good thing (through mod_wsgi ,
mod_python , or other ?)
i've been doing mod_perl dev for years, and have had some experience
with mod_python -- generally speaking, my experience is
On May 20, 2:10 pm, Jonathan Vanasco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so is Apache considered to be a good thing (through mod_wsgi ,
mod_python , or other ?)
i've been doing mod_perl dev for years, and have had some experience
with mod_python -- generally speaking, my experience is that if you
can
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 01:38:24PM -0700, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
I'm a little unclear on the better ways to deploy a Pylons app.
My production servers run nginx -- is it better to use some fastcgi
support (if so, how?) or just do a paster serve and proxy to that
port?
I've read a
I'm a little unclear on the better ways to deploy a Pylons app.
My production servers run nginx -- is it better to use some fastcgi
support (if so, how?) or just do a paster serve and proxy to that
port?
I've read a handful of ways on how-to-deploy apps, and all seem
different. I've yet to see
From general chat on #pylons a lot of people prefer to proxy, or
simply run paster.
In my deployment Paster is serving directly to the world.
I'm not sure anyone has taken up a comparison in the ways you speak
of, at least I have not come across it. I'm sure it would be a
welcomed test.
On
On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 13:38 -0700, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
I'm a little unclear on the better ways to deploy a Pylons app.
My production servers run nginx -- is it better to use some fastcgi
support (if so, how?) or just do a paster serve and proxy to that
port?
I've read a handful of
Hi again,
I'm still stuck here, and haven't been able to find anything else that
clears it up. I've read everything I can find, and rewritten my
mod_rewrite rules and conditions repeatedly, and while they work just
as I would expect, the URLs don't work correctly, inasmuch as the
pylons
and, I figured it out. Wanted to post what I came up with, both for
comment, and for anyone else who runs into it. If i've done something
wrong or just plain silly here, feel free to let me know, I'm all for
another, better solution, but at the moment this seems to have worked.
my .htaccess
Hi all... I've searched through the pylons discuss archives, and am
still a bit stuck.
I've read through the deployment guide for
pylons/apache/fcgi/mod_rewrite at pylonshq, as well as most of the
documents linked from it in reference. I'm pretty used to deploying
rails
applications in similar
72 matches
Mail list logo
