On Nov 18, 10:47 am, Graham Dumpleton <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I am curious what mix of groups, processes and threads you thought
> might give you flexibility you need for what you have in mind. Can you
> post the updated configuration?
Sure, here it is:
####################################################################
WSGIDaemonProcess cms threads=8 display-name=%{GROUP}
WSGIDaemonProcess sites threads=8 display-name=%{GROUP}
WSGIDaemonProcess other threads=8 display-name=%{GROUP}
WSGIDaemonProcess single threads=1 processes=4 display-name=%{GROUP}
WSGIRestrictProcess cms sites other single
WSGIProcessGroup %{ENV:site.process_group}
WSGIApplicationGroup %{ENV:site.application_group}
SetEnv site.process_group sites
SetEnv site.application_group %{RESOURCE}
####################################################################
At default all scripts (probably one per website) will be assigned to
the "sites" processgroup and will get their own applicationgroup. Only
for the CMS I will use the cms processgroup.
> How hard or easy that is is going to be governed by what Python web
> framework you are using. Some can't handle multiple databases, others
> can.
That's the kicker; I'm not using any other framework than my own
directly on top of mod_wsgi. Multiple database support, dynamic "CMS
Module" loading, URL parsing and a simple Document/ORM DB model are
some things that have been implemented already.
Daan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"modwsgi" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/modwsgi?hl=.
