The easiest thing I've found to use is simply uWSGI with Nginx. It's easy to just create new Django servers on the fly. You simply include the IPs in a list and it will use various algorithms (optional) to distribute the requests appropriately.
As a lot of applications are IO bound, you could also use a distributed database system to help with your scalability. I don't have much experience in that area, though. This still leaves a point of failure: Nginx (or whatever load balancer or reverse proxy you use). Maybe someone else here will know more about load balancing Nginx itself ... that might require specialized hardware. I know a lot of cloud services offer load balancers (e.g. rackspace) so you could possibly use that with multiple nginx servers and further multiple django servers. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Isaac XXX <vyrp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi there, > > maybe you're right, but I'm not really worried about RAM footprint, or > resources consumption. I'm concerned now on architecture, setting a right > scalable system, and a right cluster of systems, without lacks of > communications between them. > > Underlaying technologies can be easily replaced (say apache-mod_wsgi for > gunicorn or uwsgi), and some performance improvements can be made, but this > is not what I'm looking for. I'm looking for the tools to generate a robust > system, balancing requests through several systems, and allowing increase > the size of this system (adding more servers) without trouble. > > Cheers, > > Isaac > > > On 10/29/2012 05:18 PM, Some Developer wrote: > >> On 29/10/2012 16:03, Isaac XXX wrote: >> >>> Hi there, >>> >>> thank you for response Tom. >>> >>> Actually, I've a complete idea at how to build this system, but I lack >>> the exact information about how to join systems, and what I was looking for >>> was a source of cohesive information on all systems. At least, when I >>> finish to build that system, I will write this tutorial. >>> >>> For someone who can help me, I will describe here what I thought it can >>> be this structure: >>> >>> - 1 nginx, as a reverse proxy on frontend, serving static/media and >>> redirecting content to apache clusters >>> - n apache servers, with mod_wsgi, serving dynamic data >>> - m postgresql servers, in a master-slave flavour >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Isaac >>> >> >> Why not just ditch Apache entirely and just use Nginx for serving all >> media (both static and dynamic)? You can then save quite a few resources as >> you only need to run one HTTP server rather than two. >> >> Using Nginx to serve Django content works well. Just serve your Django >> application via FastCGI or uWSGI and you'll significantly simplify your >> configuration and reduce RAM usage on your servers as well. >> >> > -- > 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+unsubscribe@** > googlegroups.com <django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** > group/django-users?hl=en<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.
