Re: Cleaning up manage.py and import paths

On Oct 11, 9:05 am, Carl Meyer wrote: > What's the impact on adding a standard WSGI entrypoint? > - --- > > #16360 [5] has a patch to add a "wsgi.py" file to the default project, > which will serve as a standard WSGI

Re: uWSGI documentation

On Saturday, April 9, 2011 5:35:14 PM UTC+10, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Graham Dumpleton > <graham.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > > To be blunt, you are actually asking a lot for them to host detailed > > documentation on uWSGI int

Re: uWSGI documentation

To be blunt, you are actually asking a lot for them to host detailed documentation on uWSGI integration on the Django site for every possible way it can be setup. I haven't even managed to get much more than minimal setup instructions for mod_wsgi into the official Django documentation. I

Re: HttpRequest.read() issues

Silly question. Where is the proof that using a limited stream is a performance issue? These sorts of things are never going to be the bottleneck and sounds a bit like premature optimisation to think that wrapping it with a length limiting stream is going to be an issue. Graham On Thursday,

Re: HttpRequest.read() issues

On Thursday, April 7, 2011 1:00:32 PM UTC+10, Ivan Sagalaev wrote: > > On 04/03/2011 07:03 AM, Tom Christie wrote: > > It's not very obvious from the docs or source if HttpRequest.read() can > > always be safely treated as a limited input stream, or if the developer > > needs to respect

Re: State of X-Sendfile support?

On Monday, March 28, 2011 9:15:45 PM UTC+11, Gustavo Narea wrote: > > On 26/03/11 11:31, Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > > > Yes and no as nginx also has a X-Sendfile module, again possibly > > optional (can't remember). > > I didn't know there was an X-Sendfile modu

Re: State of X-Sendfile support?

On Saturday, March 26, 2011 9:15:48 PM UTC+11, Gustavo Narea wrote: > > On 26/03/11 00:17, Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > Why guess in the first place? Apache and Nginx both support 'X-Sendfile: >> ' don't they? (older nginx seemed to only support their >> own synt

Re: State of X-Sendfile support?

On Friday, March 25, 2011 11:43:39 PM UTC+11, Pascal Germroth wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-03-25 at 12:55 +0100, Łukasz Rekucki wrote: > > On 25 March 2011 12:34, Thomas Guettler wrote: > > > I look at your example code. You need to name the webserver in the > > > code. That's not

Re: Intermittent IOError exception raised and emailed to admins during file upload.

BTW, you didn't say whether you were using mod_wsgi embedded mode or daemon mode and what latter configuration was if using it. Graham On Wednesday, February 16, 2011 7:15:09 AM UTC+8, Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, February 16, 2011 5:16:01 AM UTC+11, Drew

Re: Intermittent IOError exception raised and emailed to admins during file upload.

Presuming Apace/mod_wsgi is being used, are you using https or just http? Are you using daemon mode of mod_wsgi? If yes to latter, how have you configured daemon mode? Also what Apache MPM are you using and what MPM configuration settings? Finally, what Apache and mod_wsgi versions are you

Re: Intermittent IOError exception raised and emailed to admins during file upload.

The problem is you can't just catch IOError, because the presence of WSGI middleware may mean that IOError could be generated for other reasons when reading wsgi.input. To base detection on the description in the IOError, ie., 'request data read error', would mean having to know what that

Re: One Django instance, hundreds of websites

ike API keys and such. I have an app that has the fields for >> the site I'm doing but it works fine. >> >> If you need different urlconfs, you could also do it in the middleware >> (since urls are resolved against request.urlconf which you can set >> there), but I think t

Re: Deploy many app with WSGI on same Apache Server

This question was more appropriate for the users list, not the developers list. So please use users list in future. On Sunday, January 23, 2011 9:42:13 AM UTC+11, Manuel Gonçalves - Analista de Sistemas IFPI wrote: > > Hi, anyone has done a deploy of various django apps on the same > Apache

Re: Python 3

On Thursday, December 16, 2010 4:11:25 AM UTC+11, Łukasz Rekucki wrote: > > But there has been some significant progress in that matter, like the new > email package or PEP 444 (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0444/). PEP and not PEP 444 is likely the more probable target for

Re: About the django-core mailing list

On Sep 10, 8:41 am, Anton Bessonov wrote: > +1. Explaining existence of private  core-list is needless. I would say that any information on why a structure exists is good. The Apache Software Foundation would be a good example of where a lot of effort has been taken to

LOGIN_URL, LOGOUT_URL, LOGIN_REDIRECT_URL and SCRIPT_NAME.

Can the following issue be revisited. http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8906 Conversation about it at: http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_frm/thread/c457599caab6e87d/b70e1f56ad38f4cb This is another of those issues where Django isn't being particular friendly to people

Re: 1.3: Start deprecating mod_python?

On Jun 24, 6:55 am, Robert Coup wrote: > Hi again, > > > Jacob said: I'm +1e100 or so. > > Russ said: +1. > > Now lives ashttp://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/13820 > > > > > The only catch I can think of that hasn't been raised is the hotshot > > profiling handler;

Re: 1.3: Start deprecating mod_python?

On Jun 23, 9:48 am, Alex Gaynor <alex.gay...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Graham Dumpleton > > > > > > <graham.dumple...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 23, 9:41 am, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com> > > wro

Re: 1.3: Start deprecating mod_python?

On Jun 23, 9:41 am, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Robert Coup > > wrote: > >> While people are throwing around 1.3 ideas... I

Re: Proposal: First-class WSGI support in Django 1.3 / twod.wsgi

On Jun 16, 7:32 pm, Gustavo Narea <gustavona...@2degreesnetwork.com> wrote: > Hello. > > On 16/06/10 01:33, Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > > Paste has its own problems. Paste server itself does process > > environment setup that isn't done by other WSGI hostin

Re: Proposal: First-class WSGI support in Django 1.3 / twod.wsgi

; understanding of your original proposal was that we needed to > > integrate Paste for some reason -- but if we just need to open up a > > configuration point, then I don't have any particular objections. > > Write up a patch, docs and tests and lets get it into trunk. > > Tha

Re: Proposal: First-class WSGI support in Django 1.3 / twod.wsgi

On Jun 16, 8:11 am, Gustavo Narea wrote: > Hello, Graham. > > Graham said: > > > From what I remember of this thread, haven't been following it too > > closely though, I would think the idea of relying on WebOb and Paste > > Deploy is a bad idea. > > > There are bigger

Re: Proposal: First-class WSGI support in Django 1.3 / twod.wsgi

t; understanding of your original proposal was that we needed to > integrate Paste for some reason -- but if we just need to open up a > configuration point, then I don't have any particular objections. > Write up a patch, docs and tests and lets get it into trunk. > > My only caveat

Re: DjangoCon.eu is on right now

On May 25, 5:24 pm, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Graham Dumpleton > > > > > > <graham.dumple...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 24, 7:37 pm, Russell Keith-Magee <freakboy3...@gmail.com> &

Re: DjangoCon.eu is on right now

On May 24, 7:37 pm, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > Hi all, > > This is a reminder to everyone that DjangoCon.eu is on during this > week. Jacob, Jannis, myself, and several other prominent django-dev > contributors are in Berlin, and as a result, we may not be able to pay

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Apr 5, 4:37 pm, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > However, we can't seriously start talking about Python 3 until: > >  * all the downstream vendors (DB-API implementations, mod_wsgi, etc) > have viable Python 3 implementations, and Hmmm, mod_wsgi has had working Python

Re: How to interpret the performance difference: Tornado vs Django

Read: http://blog.dscpl.com.au/2007/09/parallel-python-discussion-and-modwsgi.html Graham On Oct 7, 8:56 am, "ihomest...@gmail.com" wrote: > Thanks to you guys for the insightful discussions and thoughts on this > topic. It is always good to hear from many sides to get

Re: How to interpret the performance difference: Tornado vs Django

On Oct 6, 4:16 pm, "ihomest...@gmail.com" wrote: > I read this doc about the performance comparison between Tornado and > Django:http://www.tornadoweb.org/documentation > > I am quite new to both django and tornado (just heard about it). To me > there are a few confusing

Re: Proposal for 1.2: built-in logging with django.core.log

On Sep 17, 6:25 pm, Simon Willison wrote: > I think we should add logging to Django in version 1.2, implemented as > a light-weight wrapper around the Python logging module > (django.core.log maybe?) plus code to write errors to the Apache error > log under the

Re: Integrating Django with Tornado's web server

On Sep 15, 3:25 am, Mike Malone wrote: > > I just checked in change to Tornado that enables you to run any WSGI- > > compatible framework on Tornado's HTTP server so that Django apps > > could run on top of Tornado's HTTP server and benefit from some of the > > performance

Re: Integrating Django with Tornado's web server

On Sep 14, 8:05 am, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Bret Taylor wrote: > > > I am one of the authors of Tornado (http://www.tornadoweb.org/), the > > web server/framework we built at FriendFeed that we open sourced last

Re: Django settings paths mess

On Aug 15, 6:42 pm, Yuri Baburov <burc...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Graham > > > > > > Dumpleton<graham.dumple...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Aug 15, 1:15 pm, Yuri Baburov <burc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> H

Re: Django settings paths mess

On Aug 15, 1:15 pm, Yuri Baburov wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm trying to figure out correct overall and settings path usage > strategy for my Django applications. > What I am experiencing now is that settings.py is imported 4 times on > "python manage.py runserver" command, >

Re: append_slash alternative: remove_slash

On Jun 18, 12:24 pm, Nick Phillips <nick.phill...@otago.ac.nz> wrote: > Graham Dumpleton wrote: > >>> It's better to see it this way: Every page is an individual piece of > >>> content for itself, and still every page can have subpages. > > >>> A

Re: append_slash alternative: remove_slash

On Jun 18, 10:03 am, Waylan Limberg <way...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:19 PM, donquixote<klabaut...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > On 17 Jun., 03:14, Graham Dumpleton <graham.dumple...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> On Jun 17, 10:04 am,

Re: append_slash alternative: remove_slash

consistent within one project, so most projects > will not need to make this decision again for every single route > definition. > > On Jun 17, 1:07 am, Graham Dumpleton <graham.dumple...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > On Jun 16, 10:55 pm, Justin Myers <masterb...@gmail.com

Re: append_slash alternative: remove_slash

On Jun 16, 10:55 pm, Justin Myers wrote: > On Jun 16, 3:49 am, Ivan Sagalaev wrote: > > > Indeed I don't really want to discuss the proposal itself (I don't > > really care of the outcome since you don't propose to remove > > APPEND_SLASH

Re: repost of possible WSGIRequestHandler bug

Relates to HTTP/CGI requirements. See discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/python-web-sig/browse_frm/thread/2003e1c1ecce27b2 Graham On Jun 6, 12:21 am, crypto wrote: > Why is Django unquoting the path_info in WSGIRequestHandler? > >

Re: Error in django/http/multipartparser.py

more data available, and the remaining 4k are never returned but > simply thrown away ( look for exhaust (input_data) in > multipartparser.py) > > I merely fixed how LimitBytes maintains its internal counters; it may > not be the best fix ... and it may be curing the symptoms rather

Re: Error in django/http/multipartparser.py

On Jun 5, 11:12 am, "evert_car...@yahoo.co.uk" wrote: > Gentlemen, Ladies, > > I'm a mere Django user, not really a developer, and since time does > not permit, I do not intend to become a part of the developer team. > > Also, I'm fighting some tight deadlines ... > >

Re: GSoC Intro, Update, and Proposal -- HTTP & WSGI Support Improvements

On Apr 25, 9:47 am, ccahoon wrote: > Hello there django-dev, my name is Chris Cahoon. I'm a junior at the > University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), heading towards a BS > in CS. There's a good amount of auto-biography in my GSoC proposal, so > I'll leave that

Re: django <--> wsgi

On Apr 7, 6:47 am, Travis Parker wrote: > A first stab at the translators is up on github > athttp://github.com/teepark/django/tree/50b1e97cec14221a846a6338c40f585... > > I've done django views -> wsgi apps, wsgi apps -> django views, and > django middleware -> wsgi

Re: Killing reloaders when parent receives TERM signals

On Mar 25, 9:27 am, Dave Benjamin wrote: > No, I'm trying to run it as a dev server. I use mod_python in > production. However, I use the dev server in a shared environment so > that a few other programmers and testers in the office can view the > site. > > In any

Re: When Django will run on python3k?

On Feb 19, 10:31 pm, David Larlet wrote: > Le 19 févr. 09 à 09:58, martin.xu a écrit : > > > > > I like python 3k.,but I cannot run Django on python 3k? > > > Is there any pacth that port  Django to  Python 3.0? > > First result in

Re: Py3k port updated

On Jan 11, 10:28 am, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > > I'll give it a go, but for someone who doesn't know about running 2to3 > > etc, to make things a but more obvious can you add to your page a > > quick set of instructions as to what someone needs to do to try this > > out.

Re: Py3k port updated

On Jan 11, 10:15 am, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > > Have you by chance tried running it on top of Apache/mod_wsgi (version > > from subversion which has Python 3.0 support)? > > No, only in runserver mode. I'll give it a go, but for someone who doesn't know about running 2to3

Re: Py3k port updated

On Jan 11, 9:47 am, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > I have updated my Py3k port of django. As before, it is just the bare > minimum to get through the tutorial; as the possibly most significant > change since the previous patch, it now supports psycopg2. > > I have updated the

Re: RFC: Asynchronous Signal Receivers

On Jan 4, 8:12 pm, zvoase wrote: > > For one simple example: what if Apache decides to kill or restart the > > Django process > > after a certain amount of requests have been processed (and I know > > that many people have their servers set to do this)?  The threads > >

Re: Dynamically Altering Settings

On Dec 3, 4:52 pm, Kyle Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, we're using mod_wsgi  But I'm not sure that approach saves us > much because I'd still need to write a WSGI file for every site. > > (This might be because of my lack of mod_wsgi-fu, but wouldn't I also > need a VirtualHost directive

Re: Dynamically Altering Settings

On Dec 2, 4:28 pm, Kyle Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I needed a way to alter settings at runtime, based on the current > Site.  The method I came up with appears to work, but certainly > doesn't feel elegant and (I'm sure) could use improvement.  I'm going > to share my reasoning behind

Status on Django and Python 3.0.

Back in March in the thread: http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_frm/thread/d0922f1d56b09a4c Martin v. Löwis indicated he had made an attempt at getting 2to3 to work on Django to see how it would work under Python 3.0. From that various bits of code were identified in

Re: HttpResponse and file-like objects

On Oct 1, 11:06 am, David Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm running into an issue when trying to pass a file-like object to > HttpResponse and telling it to label it as "application/xml" > > def sitemap(request, sitemaps, section): >     page = request.GET.get('p', 1) >     fpath =

Django 1.0 and multithreading issues.

Can someone give an update as to where Django 1.0 may stand in respect of multithreading issues. I note that all the links to tickets referenced in: http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/DjangoSpecifications/Core/Threading seem to be crossed out, implying they are closed. Does this mean we are

Re: autoreload does not reload updated modules for which import is failed

On Aug 19, 8:32 pm, "Yuri Baburov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi devs, > > Happily there's ihooks.py that does 99% of work (and a bit more). > > Please see ticket and applied patch:http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8413 > Working for me on windows and linux. Hmmm, I thought one had to be

Re: Correct URL paths and compromises (ticket #285)

On Jul 6, 10:21 pm, Ivan Sagalaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > >         > >            PythonHandler django.core.handlers.modpython > >            SetEnv DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE mysite.settings > >            ... > >         > > >         > >            

Re: Bug in mod_python

On Jun 17, 11:28 pm, "Peter Melvyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I though that might be the case, I won't bother to raise a ticket then. > > We had a similiar problem and discussed it on Apache forum: perhaps it > could enlighten a problem: >

Re: Bug in mod_python

On Jun 17, 1:28 am, "Ben Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I've come across some inconsistent behavior when running django under > different conditions. This is in some existing code that has has some > problems and isn't really well written, so I'm going to ask the question > here

Re: Automatically add project path to sys.path for all handlers

On May 9, 9:06 am, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 8, 10:07 pm, Andrei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I think it would be useful to add the path to the project > > automatically to sys.path. I can't think of a situation in

Re: Automatically add project path to sys.path for all handlers

On May 8, 10:07 pm, Andrei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think it would be useful to add the path to the project > automatically to sys.path. I can't think of a situation in which I > wouldn't need to change the pythonpath and my project still would > work. You need to have the applications in

Re: django.contrib.sessions problems

kies for > > the session.) I would be interested to see what it would look like. > > I think a general refactoring is required. Explicit session > destruction and threading should be supported by all backends. Looks > like sessions are the only bit that may pose problems when

Re: Porting Django to Python 3.0 as a GSoC project

On Mar 27, 9:36 pm, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 27, 8:25 pm, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > On Mar 27, 7:17 pm, "James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 27,

Re: Porting Django to Python 3.0 as a GSoC project

On Mar 27, 8:25 pm, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 27, 7:17 pm, "James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:56 AM, Graham Dumpleton > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >  Actually,

Re: Porting Django to Python 3.0 as a GSoC project

On Mar 27, 7:17 pm, "James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:56 AM, Graham Dumpleton > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >  Actually, I already have a copy of mod_wsgi mostly working on Python > >  3.0, just sorting out

Re: Porting Django to Python 3.0 as a GSoC project

On Mar 27, 4:41 pm, "James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And it's extremely > unlikely that there'll be stable web server interfaces to run behind; > at this point we're still not quite certain what WSGI on Python 3.0 is > going to look like, and though Graham is a god among mere

Re: Porting Django to Python 3.0

On Mar 24, 10:49 am, Martin v. Löwis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At the PyCon sprint, I started porting Django to Python 3.0. In the > process, I had to make a number of changes to Python, so this port > currently requires the Python 3.0 subversion head (soon to be released > as 3.0a4). FWIW,

Re: settings imported twice Was: logging & MODPYTHON

ted module path name as core Django is. Graham On Mar 6, 9:57 am, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 6, 2:45 am, Thomas Guettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Malcolm Tredinnick schrieb:> On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 15:32 +0100, Thomas > >

Re: settings imported twice Was: logging & MODPYTHON

On Mar 6, 2:45 am, Thomas Guettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Malcolm Tredinnick schrieb:> On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 15:32 +0100, Thomas > Guettler wrote: > > [...] > > >> No, it gets imported more then once: (Answer of Malcolm): > >>http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg39061.html > >

Re: logging & MODPYTHON

On Mar 5, 6:56 pm, Thomas Guettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > AndrewD schrieb:> I would like to contribute a general Django logging system. > I have > > MODPYTHON logging working, & a basic file logging sample. I think most > > Django users want easy logging out-of-the-box, and it meets the

Re: Django 1.0 features -- the definitive list

On Dec 1, 12:37 am, "Patryk Zawadzki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2007/11/30, Forest Bond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:33:31AM -0600, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > > * #285 -- WSGI SCRIPT_NAME and PATH_INFO stuff > > > Aren't there SCRIPT_NAME/PATH_INFO/etc. problems with

Re: Django 1.0 features -- the definitive list

Adrian Holovaty wrote: > (I've been saving this e-mail since the last sprint. Given that we're > sprinting again this weekend, I figured it was about time to get this > conversation started.) > > Let's get a definitive list of features we want in Django 1.0, and > let's release it. > > I'll start

Re: Mod_python segfault after changeset 5990

/Articles/ExpatCausingApacheCrash Graham On Nov 13, 4:43 pm, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 13, 3:04 pm, Chase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Folks, > > > I've been running 0.96 on my development box with no troubles for the &

Re: Mod_python segfault after changeset 5990

On Nov 13, 3:04 pm, Chase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Folks, > > I've been running 0.96 on my development box with no troubles for the > past few months, but when I upgraded to the development version last > week,mod_pythonstarted throwing segmentation faults. I tracked the > issue to what

Re: Debugging Django

For a range of debugging options available for WSGI applications, including how to get things like pdb to run in the context of Apache, see: http://code.google.com/p/modwsgi/wiki/DebuggingTechniques Graham On Nov 10, 5:04 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 08:32:15AM

Re: Cleaning up memcached connections

On Oct 31, 4:25 am, webjunkie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Oct 30, 4:53 pm, "Jeremy Dunck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Err, what was the old version, and what's the new version? > > > "Upgrade" is kind of vague. :-/ > > Upgraded from 3.2.10 to 3.3.1 ;) Except that I still can't

Re: psycopg (both 1 and 2) may drop support for multiple interpreters (used by mod_python and mod_wsgi)

On Oct 26, 11:07 pm, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > First off, I would warn anyone out there that with about 40 virtual > hosts using Django, each apache (prefork) instance can get over 60 > megs. We didn't realize this until the server started swapping, which > was a disaster. > > We were

Re: Cleaning up memcached connections

On Oct 26, 3:59 pm, Chris Henderson wrote: > I ran into this when I was running benchmarks with ab2 on an Ubuntu > Dapper box. I ended up just using the patch that you provided to fix > the problem, but after I installed gutsy recently, I noticed that the > problem was no longer occurring on a

Re: psycopg (both 1 and 2) may drop support for multiple interpreters (used by mod_python and mod_wsgi)

same python interpreter between multiple virtual hosts and not > worry about overlap? > > On Oct 21, 8:04 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Hi Graham (and Jeremy, who originally started the thread), > > > On Sun, 2007-10-21 at 11:55 +0

Re: psycopg (both 1 and 2) may drop support for multiple interpreters (used by mod_python and mod_wsgi)

at this point if using Django from subversion checked out since May 20, revision 5302. Graham On Oct 22, 5:20 pm, Gábor Farkas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > They have now committed changes in relation to this: > > > http://www.initd.org/track

Re: psycopg (both 1 and 2) may drop support for multiple interpreters (used by mod_python and mod_wsgi)

On Oct 19, 4:28 pm, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Oct 19, 3:06 pm, "Jeremy Dunck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > There is an ongoing discussion on the psycopg list and trac regarding > > the use of psycopg with multiple interpr

Re: psycopg (both 1 and 2) may drop support for multiple interpreters (used by mod_python and mod_wsgi)

xtension and > making CursorWrapper return converted decimals for the running > interpreter. > > Notably, Graham Dumpleton reported the original bug and raised the > issue on the dj-dev list a while ago-- it's just now coming to a head. FWIW, I have suggested to them what they should

Re: I18n seems not to work with mod_wsgi

IProcessGroup hvalsluken > WSGIApplicationGroup %{GLOBAL} > Options Indexes FollowSymLinks > AllowOverride None > Order allow,deny > Allow from all > > > > --- > > On Sep 28, 1:54 am, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: I18n seems not to work with mod_wsgi

You are going to have to provide more information. Stating versions of mod_python/mod_wsgi and the configurations/script files used would be a start. Some example code of what triggers the problem and any relevant Django configuration, plus, exactly which version of Django or revision number

Re: Django 100% threadsafe with DB?

On Sep 26, 7:01 pm, Derek Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > well, that was sarcasm with the "lazy" comment...come on, i love python. > why else would i be here? :) > > but it is faked. two python threads can't run concurrently on a two > processor machine. unless, as you pointed out,

Re: Django 100% threadsafe with DB?

On Sep 26, 10:27 am, "Benjamin Slavin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/25/07, Mike Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It should be threadsafe - [... ] web applications [...] pretty much > > [become] a threaded application > > Mike, > > There are two issues here. Thread safe and concurrent

Re: mod_python documentation issues

On Sep 16, 7:54 am, Collin Grady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Graham Dumpleton said the following: > > > FWIW, I believe the documentation should just say to always add both > > parent and site. That way it properly mirrors what the development > > server does. Doi

Re: mod_python documentation issues

On Sep 15, 1:45 am, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/14/07, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Seems I am never going to win on this issue. Latest updates have seen > > the issue closed without any change be

Re: mod_python documentation issues

On Aug 30, 9:34 am, "Jeremy Dunck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/29/07, GrahamDumpleton<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Seems I can no longer add to Django tickets as the system rejects me > > saying I am trying to submit spam, so posting here instead. > > I posted for you, including you

Re: SERVER_NAME vs HTTP_HOST

On Sep 7, 1:23 pm, Siddhi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 5, 3:22 pm, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > If you are using WSGI interface to Django, then all you need to do is > > wrap Django in a simple WSGI application wrapper

Re: content of request.path

On Sep 5, 8:59 pm, Michael Radziej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 05, Thomas Guettler wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, 5. September 2007 11:27 schrieb Michael Radziej: > > > On Wed, Sep 05, Thomas Guettler wrote: > > [cut] > > > Is this the same problem as in ticket #285? > > >

Re: Adding SVN revision identifier to version

FWIW, easier to use 'svnversion' command than 'svn info' and parsing result. On Aug 18, 5:45 am, "Deryck Hodge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, all. > > Reading the Django users list, I saw someone mention not knowing what > the "pre" meant in the version string returned by django-admin.py. >

Re: WSGIRequest should set request.path to full uri path

On Jul 29, 10:30 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2007-07-28 at 23:20 +0000, Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > [...] > > > FWIW, I know I said that SCRIPT_NAME can't be calculated in > > mod_python. Well, that isn't strictly true. > >

Re: WSGIRequest should set request.path to full uri path

On Jul 29, 8:19 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 05:11 +, SmileyChris wrote: > > Sorry bout the unfinished second half of that last message, I was just > > thinking through type and I meant to delete it before posting. > > &

Re: WSGIRequest should set request.path to full uri path

Here is last time this was discussed. http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_frm/thread/19cd0976a3010cba/5329aeb3960ceb70?lnk=gst=SCRIPT_NAME=2#5329aeb3960ceb70 Graham On Jul 27, 12:51 pm, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jul 27, 12:34 pm, SmileyChri

Re: DecimalField and 'decimal' module.

On Jul 24, 12:15 pm, oggie rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One problem that could arise is if, even in different sub interpreters, > > two Django instances separately tried to use version 1 and 2 of pyscopg. > > This is because the Python wrappers for one wouldn't match the loaded > > C

Re: DecimalField and 'decimal' module.

On Jul 24, 12:26 am, oggie rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > does this also affect psycopg1? > > > Looking at psycopg1 code, the answer would appear to be that it is not > > affected. Changes to support Decimal appear to be psycopg2 specific. > > > Graham > > The problems I was seeing the

Re: DecimalField and 'decimal' module.

On Jul 23, 7:33 pm, Gábor Farkas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > > The reason I am asking is that there were recently problems found with > > pyscopg2 module and its support for use of decimal.Decimal type. In > > practice this only aff

Re: DecimalField and 'decimal' module.

On Jul 23, 5:03 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/23/07, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Rather obscure question here. I noted a comment over on the user list > > about SVN version of Django sup

DecimalField and 'decimal' module.

Rather obscure question here. I noted a comment over on the user list about SVN version of Django supporting a DecimalField database type. What is the relationship between this database field type and any particular database adapters ability to store or return values in some native database

Re: mod_python: Why use req.uri, not req.path_info?

On Jul 11, 6:25 am, "Marty Alchin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/10/07, Forest Bond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > All of this could be fixed by simply changing ModPythonRequest > > (django/core/handlers/modpython.py) to use req.path_info instead of > > req.uri. Is > > there any reason

Re: Strange behaviour of Django with mod python - bug in django or mod_python?

On Jul 1, 7:32 am, bluszcz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello people. > > I am using Apache 2.0 and mod python 3.1.4 on Ubuntu Dapper x86_64. I > found a > strange behavior during SetEnv directory. But let's start from the > beginning. > I have virtual hosts: > > > ServerName

  1   2   >