Makes sense, I will follow your advice. Sounds like more time invest upfront will equal time saved over the long run. I am defitely interested in proxy caching and load balancing. Which do you recommend? I have used #Pound while working for a university.
-Adam Cliff Wells wrote: > On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 14:40 -0700, northband wrote: > > Just spoke with my department and looks like we still want to go with a > > server scripting method. Although MVC may be better fit, for the sake > > of the learning curve, we want to use a PSP style method. > > I'm with the others who suggest using an MVC framework. The learning > curve for Django, TurboGears, Pylons, et al, is ridiculously short, and > the maintainability of the resulting code is infinitely superior. > > Why don't you take a look at the 20 minute wiki screencast that > TurboGears has and make a decision then. Although the screencast is > specifically about TurboGears, a similar screencast could be made for > almost any of the other MVC-style frameworks: > > http://files.turbogears.org/video/20MinuteWiki2nd.mov > http://www.turbogears.org/preview/docs/tutorials/wiki20/index.html > > Developing in a PHP/ASP embedded style is an anachronism these days and > for good reason. Spend a couple days learning a modern framework. The > time will be well-spent and quickly made up in shortened development > time and code maintainablility. > > > So as of now we are looking at using FreeBSD, MySQL, and some form of > > Python that will allow us to achieve great performance serving > > 30million page loads / month. > > If I were you, I'd cease worrying about the performance of the framework > itself and research caching proxies and load balancing solutions > instead. The payoff in performance will be much higher and you won't > have to make architectural compromises. > > Regards, > Cliff > > -- -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list