Il giorno 19/mar/2012, alle ore 15:46, Alexander ha scritto: > Kurtis, > > There is nothing wrong with using uwsgi protocol instead of FastCGI > but you still have to run uWSGI server and it doesn't fit "simply > using nginx" description. And I wouldn't call it "out of the box" > either if I'd have to rebuild Nginx instead of using one shipped with > my Linux distro (Debian Squeeze has Nginx with uwsgi module in > backports and uWSGI is only available in unstable branch). > > I didn't say gevent-fastcgi is best way to run WSGI application. >
Yes, but when you release a software, be prepared to answer the most useless, provocative and rageous questions :) Expecially if your project is pretty 'unique'. You are lucky (for now), the questions you got are all 'gentle' :) Your project is really funny, but you will need to fight with two factors: few users/developers understand non-blocking/async programming (albeit a lot of them use, and blindly suggest, such technologies) webservers support for multipexing fastcgi requests is practically non-existent or buggy, on which webserver you have tested your project ? In addition to this, Django is not the kind of framework/platform you can - easily - adapt to non-blocking/async paradigm :( -- Roberto De Ioris http://unbit.it JID: robe...@jabber.unbit.it -- 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.
