2009/5/7 Alex Robbins <[email protected]>:
>
> They are using different processes, doesn't that separate them?
Even if you have setup distinct WSGIDaemonProcess for each
virtualhost/port, you still want to force both to run in main
interpreter.
BTW, it is possible to get them to run in the same process using:
<VirtualHost *:80>
ServerName foo.com
WSGIDaemonProcess myapp .....
WSGIApplicationGroup %{GLOBAL}
WSGIProcessGroup myapp
</VirtualHost>
<VirtualHost *:443>
ServerName foo.com
WSGIApplicationGroup %{GLOBAL}
WSGIProcessGroup myapp
</VirtualHost>
This is because WSGIProcessGroup can reference a daemon process group
for same server name even if marked against virtual host for different
port. The WSGIDaemonProcess should be in first VirtualHost by order,
although 2.X probably doesn't enforce that, in 3.X the ordering
requirement will be enforced.
Doing this you can cut down number of processes. There is no harm
derived from having both http and https requests handled in same
daemon process group.
Graham
> On May 3, 12:00 am, Graham Dumpleton <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> If you are receiving requests for same application on both ports, then yes.
>>
>> Graham
>>
>> 2009/5/2 Alex Robbins <[email protected]>:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Sorry this reply took so long, I am in the middle of changing jobs.
>>
>> > Anyway,
>> > WSGIApplicationGroup %{GLOBAL}
>> > does not change the rough frequency with which I see the problems. I
>> > only added that directive for the port 80 virtual host, while the 443
>> > virtual host doesn't have it. Should I add it to both?
>>
>> > Thanks,
>> > Alex
>>
>> > On Apr 30, 1:47 am, Graham Dumpleton <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >> 2009/4/18 Alex Robbins <[email protected]>:
>>
>> >> >> When you say 'Also, I get no errors if I remove the maximum-requests',
>> >> >> is that on all configurations?
>> >> > Yes, that fixes it in all of the cases.
>>
>> >> >> When you run your tests, are requests always sequential? Ie., no
>> >> >> concurrent requests.
>> >> > No, the url checker is threaded, it normally runs 10 concurrent
>> >> > threads, each making a urllib.open call, printing the status code if
>> >> > not 200, then terminating.
>>
>> >> >> Does it make a difference if you specify:
>>
>> >> >> WSGIApplicationGroup %{GLOBAL}
>>
>> >> > Not sure, home sick today so I can't try it.
>>
>> >> >> Finally, what other third party C extension modules do you use besides
>> >> >> GeoDjango? Ie., databases, etc. Do you use ctypes module?
>>
>> >> > We are using the mysql backend (mysqldb I think) and Pycrypto.
>>
>> >> > No ctypes, and we don't use GeoDjango
>>
>> >> > Also, those pages don't use any crypto, that is only for credit card
>> >> > stuff or transaction submission.
>>
>> >> Any update on whether:
>>
>> >> WSGIApplicationGroup %{GLOBAL}
>>
>> >> made a difference or not?
>>
>> >> Graham
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"modwsgi" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/modwsgi?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
