http://kencochrane.net/blog/2011/06/django-gunicorn-nginx-supervisord-fabric-centos55/
I would go there. It's not Amazon EC2 specific, but Amazon's distribution by default is a Centos-based one, so everything should be in the same place. Plus, he very helpfully gives you code you can use to get everything running quickly. The hardest thing is getting nginx running within the main initlevel, but even that is not hard, just tedious. This does not, however, tell you how to setup S3 storage to be Django's file backend. You'll have to look somewhere else for that On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Stuart Laughlin <stu...@bistrotech.net>wrote: > > On Thursday, January 12, 2012 10:09:13 AM UTC-6, Javier Guerra wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Stuart Laughlin <stu...@bistrotech.net> >> wrote: >> > # author admits he is a non-sysadmin noob >> >> ad-hominem >> > False. I pointed out what the author clearly stipulates. > > "I’m a sys admin NOOB. I am also teaching myself to code. This is my first > time setting up this stack so there are probably going to be some > bugs/security issues I conveniently side stepped just to get it to work." > > "This is obviously not secure enough for a ‘production’ environment." > > If that's what you want to model your deployment after, be my guest. I > hardly think it's fallacious of me to suggest someone do otherwise. > > > > # he uses apache instead of... well... anything else > >> well-tuned apache and mod_wsgi is on the same league as the cool boys. >> (i still prefer nginx, and i don't think this is a good example of >> apache tuning, but nothing bad about it) >> > I don't care a whit about what "the cool boys" are doing. What I care > about is a production deployment that works efficiently and reliably and > that is diagnosable when something doesn't work. Apache fails those > criteria; nginx and lighttpd pass (in my opinion and the opinion of many > other developers who have used these technologies for non-trivial web > applications in production environments). > > >> > Bonus reason: >> >> > # he uses mysql instead of postgres >> >> again, might not be the bestest choice but nowhere near a bad one. >> > That's why I listed it as a bonus reason. Better than mssql and sqlite for > a production deployment anyway, eh? > > > --Stuart > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django users" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-users/-/ByBrEdUj8HUJ. > > 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. > -- 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.
