First of all: Thank you very much for writing such a good server. uWSGI wined my personal benchmark against fapws and gevent and also list of uWSGI feature is outstanding. :) 2011/9/1 Roberto De Ioris <[email protected]>: > > Il giorno 01/set/2011, alle ore 10:02, Evgeny Turnaev ha scritto: > >> It is unclear for me: >> does uWSGI able to maintain persistent connections? >> ("Connection: keep-alive") >> pep 0333 says applications must not send any hop-by-hop headers but it is up >> to >> server/gateway implementation - to be able to do keepalive connections. >> > > AFAIK there are no web server (of the 4 major) supporting keepalive for > proxied apps.
Well i am using nginx 1.1.1 patched with this patch http://mailman.nginx.org/pipermail/nginx-devel/2011-July/001057.html (upstream keepalive but mail list states only memcached, fastcgi and http supported) and this patch http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?29,213388 (to enable unbuffered uwsgi_pass with nginx) it compiles perfectly and working.. except nginx mail list said to me that "uwsgi protocol" (maybe he meant nginx uwsgi_module) does not support keepalive connections. i am testing this setup with simple wsgi app that yields some strings in a certain time interval and then returns. for every yield nginx in unbuffered mode produces http 1.1 chunk which is exactly what i want. i am just curious: does uWSGI server able to maintain persistent connection? what i did to test: i recorded wsgi request into file.. then started uwsgi with test application.. then replayed wsgi req.. for the first request uWSGI called application and returned response.. then requesting process tried to send again recorded wsgi req into same socket from which it just read first response. and nothing happens. so the main question: does uWSGI able to receive multiple request and process responses on the same socket without closing it ? if yes.. then does nginx uwsgi module support it? and what i was doing wrong? (also while i was compliling lighttpd with uwsgi.. i did not worked with latest lighttpd.. i think lighttpd changed api and renamed one function..) > Theoretically uWSGI itself already supports this as this is the only way to > work with mongrel2, > so if you care about connection cost you could try using mongrel2. > > An interesting feature/challenge would be implementing keep-alive in the > uWSGI http router/server. > > -- > Roberto De Ioris > http://unbit.it > JID: [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > uWSGI mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi > -- -------------------------------------------- Турнаев Евгений Викторович +7 906 875 09 43 -------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ uWSGI mailing list [email protected] http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi
