On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:59 AM, octopusgrabbus <old_road_f...@verizon.net> wrote: > I have written a web application in Django. At most, there will never > be more than five users logged in, if that. I chose this particular > application for Django implementation deliberately due to low use and > because it was a first-time application. > > The application sits behind a firewall, and possibly could be used > through through a non-https link through a single point of failure > "web router", which also routes our secure (https) traffic. > > So, here is my question. > > Is it really a bad thing to serve css and other static files using the > Django static settings for a low-volume application like this? > > Is it really a bad thing to do if it starts serving static pages that > way, and migrates to having the same Apache server serve these pages > off a different application on the same server?
The answer is "No, but why would you bother with the hassle anyway?" If you're only ever throwing half a dozen users at your server, you're not going to see any performance problems of almost *any* kind. You certainly won't see any from the static page views. However -- you have Apache running. If you've got Apache running and serving dynamic Django content, getting Apache to serve static content is something like 5 lines of configuration max -- and then you can be absolutely certain that there wont be performance issues. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.