>> even uWSGI speaks directly via zeromq, the WSGI "layer" adds a callable. >> It could hurt performance in a "hello world" benchmark, but on real >> web-apps it is irrelevant. >> > > There's two ways to think about this. If the performance difference is > irrelevant, then why do the work at all? Just put nginx up with gunicorn > and be done.
Infact, you will find the same amount of nginx+uWSGI config out-there. Users choose nginx+gunicorn because it is easy, others choose nginx+uWSGI because it is more powerful, mod_wsgi still rules as it is really solid. It is never a matter of performance. I am supporting mongrel2+uWSGI for its easyness in scalability, not for raw performance. > everyone is over double - then do it the right way and cut WSGI out > completely. > sorry, i do not know wich kind of benchmark you have made, but for an hello world mongrel2+uWSGI outperform mongrel2+brubeck in every test. Remember uWSGI it is a pure-c app, it only goes into python for the "return Hello World" part (even start_response is implemented in pure-c). I do not want to start a flame, but honestly i do no understand what is your problem with my announcement, uWSGI is out by years and already used in a lot of context, why having it supporting mongrel2 should be a problem instead of a good thing ? -- Roberto De Ioris http://unbit.it
