> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 15:12:22 +0100, "Roberto De Ioris"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>yes it support FastCGI too, uwsgi (from low-level point of view) is more
>>easy to parse (less logic) but it is more limited. If you do not need
>>strings bigger than 64k it is the most performant way.
>
> I won't need to send that big strings between the www server and
> uwsgi, so I'll use the uwsgi protocol instead.
>
>>very probably you do not nginx at all for such setup (neither a http
>>proxy), just run uWSGI in native http mode with:
>>
>>uwsgi --http-socket :port --lua <script>
>>
>>for embedded systems it is the cheapest way
>
> Thanks for the tip. Most of the site will deliver static HTML pages,
> and run only a couple of Lua scripts to handle form validation.
>
> However, if using uwsgi as the web server, it must support the
> following features:
> - password-protected directories (eg. .htaccess)
> - starts at boot time through init.d and runs as daemon
> - deliver both HTML pages and run Lua scripts that rely on SQLite
>
>

they are all pretty standard features, eventually feel free to post your
config/ideas here for getting back suggestions

-- 
Roberto De Ioris
http://unbit.it
_______________________________________________
uWSGI mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi

Reply via email to