Devin Torres wrote: > If I understand you correctly, there's a flup entry point that forks > the process instead of flup_fcgi_thread? I'm not sure that would have > good performance, but maybe you think forking is capable of good > performance in this case. After forking, would SQLAlchemy connections > stay persistent? Is that safe?
Hmm... well, yeah, that probably wouldn't work well -- I think each request being a new fork won't get any shared connections. So perhaps a cluster of servers would work better for you. -- Ian Bicking : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://blog.ianbicking.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
