> On 21 Jan 2016, at 2:48 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 1:57 AM Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net 
> <mailto:robe...@robertcollins.net>> wrote:
> On 20 January 2016 at 12:04, Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:bchesn...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > not at all. But I made the assumption that the wsgi server maintained a
> > thread directly or not where the python application is running .
> >
> > In any case there is some sort of wrapping done in the same thread/process
> > where the python application is running. And then nothing stop to give the
> > socket away to the application and tell to the server to stop to communicate
> > with it.
> What socket?
> Data could be being passed by shm, for instance.
> -Rob
> While shared memory would be quite a bad idea, then why not. I still don't 
> see why having a way to upgrade the connection can't be done.
> Call it I/O resource or Socket, the issue is the same. At the end nothing 
> stop the server to pass the control to the app. If we forget the socket 
> (which is btw the simplest design) then the server could stop to control the 
> I/O resource when the application ask it to do it. At some point either a 
> garbage collection or a basic resource return/claim flow could be used to 
> definitely free the resource.
> The thing behind that is that it would allow the WSGI spec to only focus on 
> providing a strict gateway workflow without forcing the application to adopt 
> a concurrency model aync or not.

No one has said you cannot do it. because though it is only able to be 
implemented in a subset of WSGI servers/adapters, then it doesn’t seem 
appropriate that it be a part of the core WSGI specification.

This is the role of a WSGI extension as found at:


So go talk to the authors of uWSGI, and the other couple of packages available 
for trying to plug these into some of the pure Python based WSGI servers and 
come to an agreement between yourselves as to a standard way of doing it and 
the extension specification can be added to the wsgi.org <http://wsgi.org/> 


Web-SIG mailing list
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig

Reply via email to