Yes, just tested it. Many parallel downloads, nice speed, and no locks even more. Nginx Rocks!
On 27 мар, 15:41, "Roberto De Ioris" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thx, but what is the best solution for now to deploy web2py with more > > than 3k users online, which can upload and download files? > > No using a streaming upload webserver will solve your problem > > Move to nginx, this will solve your specific problem, and use > X-Accel-Redirect (this is the equivalent of X-Sendfile in nginx) for all > the downloads. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 27 , 11:46, "Roberto De Ioris" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Thx, <processes>4</processes> helps. > >> > But so if 4 users go to page with image, or upload some file, all will > >> > be crashed again. > >> > Is it a good to have <processes>1000</processes>? > >> > Sounds bad > > >> This is a normal deploy problem (not related to uWSGI). This is why > >> async/evented is so loved this days :) If your machine can tolerate 1000 > >> processes (but sorry i do not think so) use this, but every process is a > >> full copy of your app stack so memory will be devoured. > > >> If you have so many users doing uploads, you can try threads (they are > >> cheaper than processes) but the best solution would be Cherokee > >> disabiling > >> streaming uploads to pass the request to uWSGI only when the upload is > >> done. > > >> I will talk to the Cherokee lead developer to reintroduce this feature > >> (before 1 point releases Cherokee worked that way) > > >> -- > >> Roberto De Iorishttp://unbit.it > > -- > Roberto De Iorishttp://unbit.it
