Vasile I wrote a "bit" not "a lot". The difference is only given by the fact that uwsgi is more configurable. No need to attack me on uwsgi vs scgi, since I even wrote about uwsgi usage (other contributors can confirm that). I asked for comments not for flames, please.
Roberto thanks for your corrections! The state machine for SCGI serving is really simple, but indeed you are right, unless you use libscgi the parser is in python. And using libscgi is not worth the trouble! mic 2011/9/13 Roberto De Ioris <[email protected]>: > >>> >>> it is a bit harder to setup >> >> are you joking ? >> search this group and u will see my comments using uwsgi on webfaction >> >> nginx <-socket-> uwsgi+python >> >> u can use builtin webserver and u will not have layers at all >> and SCGIServer is written in python which makes it slower >> >> it scales smoothly on multicores >> >> uwsgi has master and slave processes, >> also has uGreen module (~ greenlet) - >> u see: master->child processes->ugreenlets (if I can say so) - that makes >> it >> able to handle much more requests than scgiserver can >> >> and not very least feature: it is STABLE >> also it is able to reload child processes, >> can limit the memory for child processes and many many features, >> and still FASTER >> >> and a very, very nice feature is touch reload when testing routes >> >> I respect ur contribution, but u didn't convinced me that scgi is better >> than uwsgi >> > > > Come on, no need to fight :) > > I do not think Michele is saying that SCGI (that remember is only a > communication protocol) is better than something else. Even Cherokee > (albeit being a uWSGI supporter) uses SCGI pure-python for its admin > interface. Implementing SCGI in python is very easy (no more than a dozen > of lines) so if you only need a gateway (and not a deployment platform) > it could be a very good choice. > > The Michele analysys about performance is a bit wrong as he should say: > > (for scgi) > > webserver <-> socket <-> python scgi parser <-> web2py > > (for uWSGI with uwsgi protocol) > > webserver <-> socket <-> C uwsgi parser <-> web2py > > But generally, if you need to attach an app to a webserver, implementing > SCGI is the easiest choice (both uwsgi and fastcgi are binary protocol, > and writing good http parser is not the easiest task in the world) > > -- > Roberto De Ioris > http://unbit.it >
