Hey Gilles, I don't think there's any obvious reasons. You use what is best for your environment. I think the FAQ in uWSGI docs says this best (http://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.org/en/latest/FAQ.html):
"Will my app run faster with uWSGI? It’s unlikely. The biggest bottleneck in web app deployment is the application itself. If you want a faster environment, optimize your code or use techniques such as clustering or caching. We say that uWSGI is fast because it introduces a very little overhead in the deployment structure." I personally like nginx as a web server when using uWSGI because it integrates so nicely with it. The uWSGI nginx module (http://wiki.nginx.org/HttpUwsgiModule) was introduced in nginx 0.8.40 and it's great to work with and setup. Hope that helps a bit. Experiment, and you'll be deploying in your applications in no time :) -- Bartek Ciszkowski Software Developer http://bartek.im On Thursday, February 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Gilles wrote: > Hello > > I'm only getting started with learning the options to run Python web > apps instead of PHP. > > From what I read, it appears that WSGI is a better option than > FastCGI+Flup to run Python apps, and the choice is mainly between the > mod_wsgi for Apache and uWSGI available for the main players. > > Provided the above is correct, I have two questions: > 1. Are there obvious reasons to use uWSGI over mod_wsgi? > > 2. Provided I do go for uWSGI, which web server is recommended? > Apache, Cherokee, Nginx, or Lighttpd? > > Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > uWSGI mailing list > [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi > >
_______________________________________________ uWSGI mailing list [email protected] http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi
