Tres Seaver wrote: > > Note first that we use mod_wsgi's "daemon"-mode exclusively,
Forgive me for being uninformed, but what are the other options? > which > implies creating one or more dedicated subprocesses for each "process > group" defined in the Apache config. Does each sub process get its own python interpretter? (ie: does it have to reload all its config and open up its own database connections again?) > In that mode, Apache may create new subprocesses at any time, and may > destroy old ones (e.g., after reaching a max-requests threshhold). The > real issue isn't opening the ZODB; Even if the ZODB doesn't have index files? > cache. A second issue for multi-process configurations is doing all the > product initialization dance (for a Zope2 app) or processing ZCML (for > either Zope2 or Zope3). The "frist hit slow" problem is intrinsic to > any lazy + scalable system. Is there really no way that the "slow" work can be shared? >> The second is a problem I see an app I'm working on heading towards. The >> app has web-alterable configuration, so in a multi-threaded and >> particular multi-process environment, I need some way to get the other >> threads or processes to re-read their configuration when it has changed. >> >> Hope you guys can help! > > Making the ZODB connection pool sharable across processes doesn't seem > feasible. Indeed, but I don't see this app having any zodb connections (necessarilly ;-) ) But, even if you were using, say SQLAlchemy and its connection pooling, wouldn't each process end up having its own connection pool, etc? cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com