> On Jan 18, 1:38 pm, GSP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I stumbled upon a thread on the django group recently where questions > > about Turbogears performance were raised: > > > > http://groups.google.ca/group/django-users/browse_thread/thread/ab111... > > > > "TurboGears would be a terrible choice. Python does not do well on > > threads > > and has been known to lock up solid when executing a fork() out of a > > thread.
TurboGears, even TurboGears 1 works very well in a multi-process deployment with load balancing between processes behind a reverse proxy server. Multithreaded python web servers do perform better than single threaded servers, particularly per unit of memory consumed, but multi-process configurations allow you to scale across multiple processors better. In my experience a mix of the two provides the best of both worlds, and that's exactly the kind deployment senario that high traffic TurboGears sites use. If you want to scale, I think TurboGears+SQLAlchemy will do very well, and we are definitely working to add lots of scalability features to TG2, so that it should do even better. Django works, and is great. But whoever said TurboGears will not scale has clearly not tried. We may need to highlight multi-process deployments more in our documentation, but since the single process way can handle lots and lots of scenarios, we've made that the first thing we show people because it is simple to setup. --Mark Ramm --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" 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/turbogears?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
