Well, there's almost a week since the first message in this thread!
Arriving some conclusion, I think I'm going with Pylons for the UI.
Asynchronous behaviours (if needed) can be achieved with some
integration with another server like Tornado. There's even some
experiments of asynchronous modules
People:
The "votation" is not relevant, the discussion is, and the reasons
that support each vote. And those are itself part of the research I'm
doing, and it surely will help in making the decision.
But, they are an important part, because I didn't want to make a
decision in "solo", since this i
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
>
> The big downside I see with Django and other WSGI based frameworks is that
> it becomes difficult to run "background threads" in a clean way.
This can be handled by using Eventlet or GEvent. See the gevent webchat
demo, for example, to see
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Eric Florenzano wrote:
> I think that it's silly to hold this to a vote, frankly. Do the research,
> weigh the pros and cons, and then make a decision. It's you who's going to
> be doing the implementation, so the choice is something that you can live
> with. H
I think that it's silly to hold this to a vote, frankly. Do the research,
weigh the pros and cons, and then make a decision. It's you who's going to
be doing the implementation, so the choice is something that you can live
with. Holding something like this to a vote is just going to invite flame
Todd:
Very valuable comments, that's just the kind of problem I believe
should be addressed with an asynchronous approach.
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
> Not going to vote either way, as I haven't contributed to Cassandra in over
> a year :) But one quick opinion:
>
> Th
Not going to vote either way, as I haven't contributed to Cassandra in over
a year :) But one quick opinion:
The big downside I see with Django and other WSGI based frameworks is that
it becomes difficult to run "background threads" in a clean way. Someone
mentioned this earlier, but worth repeati
Yes, in the big picture, I guess Pylons has a greater community and adoption.
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Miguel Verde wrote:
> -1 vote for Tornado. As far as I know, it still doesn't run on Windows and
> has had only 2 releases. I don't think it makes sense to push that as a
> dependency
-1 vote for Tornado. As far as I know, it still doesn't run on Windows and
has had only 2 releases. I don't think it makes sense to push that as a
dependency to potential deployers of this UI.
There are many alternatives with broader platform support and more
consistent mainline releases: Bottle
tornado +1 - it's lightweight and has few external dependencies.
Pylons +4
Tornado +3
Django +1
Undetermined +2
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Ray Slakinski wrote:
> I'll put in a vote for django, you can use managers to handle a lot of the
> object code.
>
> Ray Slakinski
>
> On 2010-04-13,
I'll put in a vote for django, you can use managers to handle a lot of the
object code.
Ray Slakinski
On 2010-04-13, at 2:15 PM, Pablo Cuadrado wrote:
> Pylons +4
> Tornado +2
> Django +1
> Undetermined +2
>
> Do I smell Pylons? :)
>
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Brandon Williams wrote:
Pylons +4
Tornado +2
Django +1
Undetermined +2
Do I smell Pylons? :)
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Brandon Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Pablo Cuadrado
> wrote:
>
>> Well, so far we are:
>>
>> Pylons +3
>> Tornado +2
>> Django +1
>> Undetermined +2
>>
>
> +1 for pylons.
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Pablo Cuadrado wrote:
> Well, so far we are:
>
> Pylons +3
> Tornado +2
> Django +1
> Undetermined +2
>
+1 for pylons. I think a more popular framework is likely to have better
chances of being maintained and avoiding bitrot in the long haul.
-Brandon
going on Tornado. I don't have experience
> with Pylons.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Pablo Cuadrado
> Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:33:11
> To: ;
> Subject: Re: python web framework suggestions (for Cassandra Web UI) needed
>
> David:
>
> Personally, I&#x
I would be happy to help get this going on Tornado. I don't have experience
with Pylons.
-Original Message-
From: Pablo Cuadrado
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:33:11
To: ;
Subject: Re: python web framework suggestions (for Cassandra Web UI) needed
David:
Personally, I'm betwe
opefully nothing other than a Cassandra connection
> to run.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Pablo Cuadrado
> Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:55:46
> To:
> Subject: python web framework suggestions (for Cassandra Web UI) needed
>
> Hi!
>
> I made a proposal ab
Please use something like Tornado. A Cassandra web GUI should not require a
heavyweight framework and hopefully nothing other than a Cassandra connection
to run.
-Original Message-
From: Pablo Cuadrado
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:55:46
To:
Subject: python web framework suggestions (for
Some thoughts I've had last night while handling a beer:
A web UI for Cassandra, will be sometimes querying remote APIs (JMX,
Thrift), for every node in the cluster.
So, about the non-blocking/blocking issue that Brandon pointed out:
-
In a totally synchronous/blocking approach, I expec
So far, I think I'm going for Pylons, the discussion gave this "pseudo-votes":
Pylons +3
Tornado +1
Django +1
Undetermined +2
Any further comments on this issue will be appreciated!
Thanks!
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 4:58 AM, Eric Florenzano wrote:
> Bottom line with this kind of a project is to
Bottom line with this kind of a project is to go with what you're most
familiar with. If you're equally unfamiliar with all frameworks, then the
quality of documentation becomes more important.
Personally, I'd take a hard look at Werkzeug--it's a library, not a
framework. Which means you get to
It is indeed a web framework, and made for sys admins to interact with
Cassandra, not for hosting millions of users concurrently.
And you're right: those are helloworld benchmarks.
I was concerned a few days ago about the sync/async issue, browsing
over examples on Telephus, Twissandra, Lazyboy,
I don't really consider any hello world benchmarks valid, you'd want to
investigate what your implementation would entail in different frameworks
and do mini-benchmarks to validate which is faster. But, if it's just a web
framework, as Brandon said, I doubt performance will matter to any great
degr
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Pablo Cuadrado wrote:
> Yes, I'm planning on Lazyboy.
>
> The Performance part on the Tornado wiki is quite impressive. Do you
> think it's accurate?
>
> http://www.tornadoweb.org/documentation#performance
Using Lazyboy, you'd be mixing blocking sockets with a no
Yes, I'm planning on Lazyboy.
The Performance part on the Tornado wiki is quite impressive. Do you
think it's accurate?
http://www.tornadoweb.org/documentation#performance
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Joseph Bowman wrote:
> A little different approach than Twisted, a lot less there, and ye
A little different approach than Twisted, a lot less there, and yea no
thrift generator, but if you plan on using Lazyboy you'd be fine.
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Brandon Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Pablo Cuadrado >wrote:
>
> > Joseph:
> >
> > Is it somehow similar
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Pablo Cuadrado wrote:
> Joseph:
>
> Is it somehow similar to Twisted? am I wrong?
Yes, minus every protocol other than HTTP, daemonization utils, etc. Oh,
and thrift doesn't have a generator for it last I checked.
-Brandon
Joseph:
Is it somehow similar to Twisted? am I wrong?
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Joseph Bowman wrote:
> Well Tornado is light weight, it is it's own web server as well, so no need
> to run something like apache in front of it, and is a nice light framework.
> It's an eventd style process, s
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:42 AM, gabriele renzi wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Pablo Cuadrado
> wrote:
> > - Really small footprint is a plus: "do we really need to include
> > that, and that, and that other thing?"
>
> as I can imagine your app won't have any state per se, so you don'
Well Tornado is light weight, it is it's own web server as well, so no need
to run something like apache in front of it, and is a nice light framework.
It's an eventd style process, so supports lots of connections very well,
which would give you more flexibility is designing clients to work with it
Gabriele:
Yes, the idea is to make it light-weighted. However, I may add: it
would be nice (for us all) to use a framework which the community
feels comfortable with.
I'm trying to find a balance between features and footprint, having a
small footprint is very important, but also, we want somethi
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Pablo Cuadrado wrote:
> - Really small footprint is a plus: "do we really need to include
> that, and that, and that other thing?"
as I can imagine your app won't have any state per se, so you don't
have any DB issues, you probably won't even need sessions, why not
Joseph: Of course, I understand it's out of date but I'm sure it worths a look!
Dan: You're right, it looks like Pylons is more suitable. Some pro's I see:
- Mako seems to be a faster template engine than Django's one.
- Looks to be really WSGI oriented from scratch.
- As for the ORM, it just won
I like Django. Its wide adoption, great docs and included batteries
make it an easy sell.
But what your describing is more like a pylons, aka if you dont want
an orm in Pylons, don't include it.
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Matthew Dennis wrote:
> +1 for pylons, I've been quite happy with it
Lazyboy has had a lot of updates since the implementation that's in place
there. Those Digg guys have been busy. So I wouldn't use jsondra as much
more than an example of how to use tornado for the framework, rather than to
build off of as I imagine the lazyboy usage is different with current
versi
I like Pylons also, for what I've read. Haven't worked with it so far,
but I'll give it try today to see how it performs.
Joseph: That's great! I'm also thinking on Lazyboy, and a restful
interface. I'll take a look at it.
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Joseph Bowman wrote:
> Way back when I
Way back when I wanted to try and use node.js and Cassandra, I started work
on a restful interface using Tornado and Lazyboy. I've since moved on from
that idea and the project is way out of date, but you can see what I had
done at this project on github - http://github.com/joerussbowman/jsondra
O
+1 for pylons, I've been quite happy with it so far - lightweight,
very flexible, loosely coupled components...
On Apr 9, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Gary Dusbabek wrote:
I like pylons. Easy templating and relatively light weight. In my
experience, it was easier to get something working in pylons t
I like pylons. Easy templating and relatively light weight. In my
experience, it was easier to get something working in pylons than
django, but I am impatient.
Gary.
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 09:55, Pablo Cuadrado wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I made a proposal about building a Cassandra Web UI. One of it's
Hi!
I made a proposal about building a Cassandra Web UI. One of it's main
components, will be Python on the server side.
However, as Gary D. pointed out, it will be interesting to get your
opinions on which framework to use.
I suggested Django for being well-known and largely documented, but
any
39 matches
Mail list logo
