On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Christopher Grebs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have read the discussion about the issue of a missing WSGI wrapper for
> Cherokee. I'm planning to push my whole infrastructure over to a Cherokee
> based setup. But since there are many wsgi applications running I would be
> pleased to let them run in the same way I did with my apache setup. But with
> all advantages Cherokee provides (Load Balancing, easy Administration etc.).
> I know that WSGI-Based applications can run without any code patching on
> CGI/SCGI/FastCGI and so on... But the way WSGI handles just everything is
> ingenious.
>
> Is there any progress on a WSGI module yet?

Are you sure you read the whole thread?  mod_wsgi is pretty counter to
the entire design philosophy of cherokee (all
applications/modules/whatever kept out-of-process).

>From Alvaro's initial response to my mod_wsgi question:

> Firstly, from the architectural point of view it is simply madness...

> Second, it sounds hard to believe that mod_wsgi is faster than a plain
> an simple SCGI application writing to a Unix socket. (Remember that WSGI
> application can also use FastCGI and SCGI backends).

The following discussion basically breaks down to:

1.  In-process WSGI may be faster than out-of-process, but against the
design principles of Cherokee.
2.  If you're going to run your application out-of-process, why not
use a platform agnostic protocol like SCGI/FastCGI?

That being said I believe embedding WSGI into Cherokee *is* possible,
but then why not just use Apache+mod_wsgi?

Of course I could be wrong and am very interested in hearing any
further opinions/explanations.

Michael Schurter
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

Reply via email to