Re: [Webware-discuss] Why does ThreadedAppServer.addSocketHandler() write to disk?

2010-06-08 Thread Christoph Zwerschke
Am 07.06.2010 22:00 schrieb Steve Schwarz: We are looking to run multiple Webware instances from a single Webware directory/checkout and can do so by providing configuration differences via command line args. Just out of curiosity, why do you want to do that? I'm usually running different

Re: [Webware-discuss] Why does ThreadedAppServer.addSocketHandler() write to disk?

2010-06-08 Thread Christoph Zwerschke
Am 08.06.2010 21:27 schrieb Steve Schwarz: We'd like to simplify our deployment. Now our admins have to install Webware multiple times for each appserver instance on multiple servers. It would be easier to just deploy once and have all instance refer to that one check out. Ok, as I

Re: [Webware-discuss] Why does ThreadedAppServer.addSocketHandler() write to disk?

2010-06-08 Thread Steve Schwarz
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Christoph Zwerschke c...@online.de wrote: Am 08.06.2010 21:27 schrieb Steve Schwarz: We'd like to simplify our deployment. Now our admins have to install Webware multiple times for each appserver instance on multiple servers. It would be easier to just

Re: [Webware-discuss] Why does ThreadedAppServer.addSocketHandler() write to disk?

2010-06-08 Thread Christoph Zwerschke
Am 08.06.2010 21:44 schrieb Steve Schwarz: Yep. Looks like we are experiencing GIL contention on our compute heavy pages. Refactoring is also going on in the application to solve that problem. Adding an alternative to the MultiThreadedAppServer has been on my todo list for Webware for quite a

Re: [Webware-discuss] Why does ThreadedAppServer.addSocketHandler() write to disk?

2010-06-08 Thread Steve Schwarz
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Christoph Zwerschke c...@online.de wrote: Maybe a MultiProcessAppServer could be the alternative or somethin with an approach like Concurrence or Twisted. We are using Twisted to dispatch/maintain the Webware process pool. Will see about possibility of open