Great!
I have modified the web2py slice at
http://www.web2pyslices.com/main/slices/take_slice/57
and added in a complete minimalist lighttpd configuration file for use
with web2py based on tests I have just completed with a new VPS. I
have also showed how to enable SSL (provided you have
Done.
Please see section 'Complete Minimalist Lighttpd Configuration File'
at http://www.web2pyslices.com/main/slices/take_slice/57
I have also added in a section 'Using Lighttpd on port 80 for Secure
Web2py admin Access' since it is important to emphasise there should
only be one instance of
As another added note.I can further reduce my memory footprint by
using wsgi 3.X.
3.X has new directives, one called LazyInitialization, which does not
initialize the python interpreter when apache starts, only when a
request to the wsgi process is made.
Along with this is a directive that tells
Round and round we go with more diversionary smokescreens.
I have provided a quick 'bang you are there' approach for setting up
an accepted and proven web server, Lightttpd, that tests show beats
the pants off Apache.
Apache fans cry foul and won't accept test results. They blame users
for poor
You need to change your tone of voice John.
If anyone has been have crying foul, and won't accept test results. It is you.
I have shown you a valid apache configuration that is comparable to
lighttpd, for the sake of this thread it is important to show that
apache can too have a low memory
This has gone way off topic and personal, however I suppose I should
try and do something to repair the ill feeling.
I acknowledge Thadeus is a valuable and talented contributor.
I don't have the time or inclination to address anything that does not
specifically address relevant topics and doing
John,
Thank you for the suggestions.
When I use the SERVER command, I get can't bind to port errors
The other issues you mention all seem OK.
r...@x:/etc/lighttpd# /etc/init.d/lighttpd restart
Syntax OK
* Stopping web server
lighttpd [ OK ]
Syntax OK
I avoided the 'address already in use' errors by using port 8000
Still getting 404 - File not found
I found this in the lighttpd error log, which looks like it might have
something to do with my problem
2010-02-19 12:44:40: (server.c.931) WARNING: unknown config-key:
url.rewrite-once (ignored)
Found it !!!
I needed to include the mod_rewrite module.
Everything seems to be working now
On Feb 19, 9:22 am, raven ravenspo...@yahoo.com wrote:
John,
Thank you for the suggestions.
When I use the SERVER command, I get can't bind to port errors
Now that I have web2py working with lighttpd, instead of its own web
server,
my application runs much, much faster and requires just over half as
much memory
( 39M for web2py, python and lighttpd instead of 63M ) leaving me
plenty of room in my 64M system
This is great!
Without lighttpd
top -
You would have a similar memory footprint running apache/mod_wsgi.
Mind you I am also running Ruby (mod_passenger) as well as mod_wsgi,
so the memory usage is a tiny bit higher because of the extra ruby
processes.
free -m
total used free sharedbuffers cached
I do not accept the data below as complete for comparative purposes
since we do not know what the memory use by Apache proper itself is.
The figures we are using to add up memory use for web2py are resident
memory (RSS) for
web server for web2py
+ python for web2py
+ database for web2py
RSS for
Happy ?
ps aux | grep apache ps aux | grep wsgi ps aux | grep
postgres ps aux | grep python
USER PID %CPU %MEMVSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND
root 3878 0.6 1.4 145136 7528 ?Ss 22:49 0:00
/usr/sbin/apache2 -k start
www-data 3950 0.0 1.2 145288 6360
Apache: 6360
web2py: 21244
Postgres: 26693
Total of 27MB, during peak hours of this site. PostgreSQL is
negligible since you can pick your database.
-Thadeus
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Thadeus Burgess thade...@thadeusb.com wrote:
ww-data 3950 0.0 1.2 145288 6360 ? S
please do. I could use this.
On Feb 19, 11:35 pm, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks.
From below we get the following resident memory use (RSS) for Apache
with mod_wgsi and web2py (using Postgre database)
13,888 Apache (=7528+6360)
5,612 Some process associated with Apache for
If the only discussion here is tight vps, then postgresql results
should not even come into matter in your bottom line. Taking out 20MB
for the postgres process, and add 5 mb for a sqlite in the
python/web2py process, thats an extra 15 mb you can play around with.
Also, configuring apache to run
Well, I gave this a try, and ended up with 404 errors.
fcgihandler.py suggests adding to lighttpd.conf
server.error-handler-404 = '/test.fcgi'
This does not help, nor does
server.error-handler-404 = /error-handler.fcgi
( There no files on my system named *.fcgi, so I do not see how this
could
Hi Raven
The name fcgihandler.py is just the name of a web2py start up file
passed to Python.
The name fcgihandler.py should not or need not appear anywhere in the
lightttpd.conf file, since there is no need to give lighttpd the
responsibility to start up web2py as an independent process.
What
I was reviewing this threadand wow! very nice explanation and
presentation of playing video streaming via web2py.
Many thanks John, your thoughts looks like very interesting.
Alex
El 14/02/2010 3:12, John Heenan escribió:
Thanks for your comments also.
Yes .flv and other video files will
John,
Here is what I have placed in the file /etc/lighttpd/lighttpd.conf
$
fastcgi.server = (
/handler_web2py.fcgi = (
handler_web2py = ( #name for logs
check-local = disable,
socket = /tmp/fcgi.sock,
)
)
)
$HTTP[host] == 100.101.102.103 {
Raven,
1) Use
$SERVER[socket] == 100.101.102.103 {
instead of
$HTTP[host] == 100.101.102.103 {
2) Did you restart lighttpd with
/etc/init.d/lighttpd restart
and where there any problems when restarting?
3) Is mod_fastcgi included with server.modules in lighttpd.conf?
4) Is web2py actually
Raven
$SERVER[socket] == 0.0.0.0:80 {
will allow all IP interfaces.
John Heenan
On Feb 19, 11:42 am, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
Raven,
1) Use
$SERVER[socket] == 100.101.102.103 {
instead of
$HTTP[host] == 100.101.102.103 {
2) Did you restart lighttpd with
Thank you for the lighttpd howto. It looks very helpful. Hopefully,
I will be able to clear some time next week to give it a go.
I noticed that, at the end, you spend time on URL remapping. To
benefit from this either routes.out of routes.py needs to be used or
internal techniques need to be
Very well done.
Did you ever try streaming files with lighttpd? For example serving
via download a large video file, larger than ram? (kpax comes with an
example of streaming). Does it work well?
Massimo
On Feb 13, 1:42 am, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
As requested I have placed a
Thanks for you comments.
Yes you are right. I have separated out URL mapping to another
section. This dramatically simplifies the configuration.
I have also added in a few bits and pieces, such as on running web2py
as user www-data instead of user root.
Slice is at
Thanks for your comments also.
Yes .flv and other video files will play with Lightttpd using normal
media players, for example, using JW Player in kpax/static/
mediaplayer.swf . It is even possible to use players while the actual
video file is hosted on another server to where the main site and
On Feb 12, 6:16 pm, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
For lower memory footprint on a tight VPS I do not believe any
configuration of Apache with web2py (using mod_wgsi or otherwise) will
beat a good lighttpd configuration with a FastCGI UNIX socket
interface to web2py.
I have helped
I should stop feeding the troll.
It is obvious Graham has no relevant benchmarks to prove his case, has
no intention of providing them.
None of the links provided make a relevant case.
The bizarre 'Nginx + Apache/mod_wsgi' reference to refer to using
Nginx for static content and Apache with
Let's cool down.
You are both very much welcome on this list and you have both shown
ability to provide excellent contributions to this list.
Graham wrote mod_wsgi for apache and knows it inside out. No question
about that. mod_wsgi is the best way to deply web2py on apache.
Period.
John has
John has provided excellent benchmarks that can help us improve and
can help us make better usage of the memory.
He certainly helped me to get up and running!
Something I am interested in following up on.
Great. It would be really great if there was an out of the box
command line switch to
We do not have to close it as long as there is a change of tone.
In web2py.py comment this line:
import gluon.import_all
and you should be good to go with less memory.
Massimo
On Feb 12, 9:02 am, raven ravenspo...@yahoo.com wrote:
John has provided excellent benchmarks that can help us
The title of the thread is How much memory does web2py need on Unix.
I provided a concrete answer.
The question is not answered by stating mod_wgsi is the 'best' way to
deploy web2py with Apache.
I provided real data about using lighthttpd and a UNIX socket. There
is every reason to believe
I think this is an excellent point.
My data demonstrated a 40MB memory solution is feasible.
I am absolutely amazed and disappointed I cannot get such simple
points gracefully acknowledged by a self styled 'expert' and by the
moderator.
The reason I suggested opening a new thread was to
As requested I have placed a howto on web2pysplices at
http://www.web2pyslices.com/main/slices/take_slice/57
I have written a considerable preface to clarify issues and to
indicate why we should pay attention to issues concerned with keeping
memory use low.
John Heenan
On Feb 13, 2:41 am,
Look like OpenVZ container. I play with this a lot.
First of all memory size, not always limits your need.
64M - to low. Hardly to run static serve apache. (moderate load).
VZ container also has limits for (sample from my server)
100: kmemsize23782914102256 2147483647
2147483647
It seems that everyone is running with Apache and gobs of memory
available. They cannot really get their heads around running web2py
out of the box in 64K.
So let me explain why this is important.
When I sell a desktop application to someone, all they have to pay for
is my coding work. They
You mean 64MB, not 64K, I hope.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:30 PM, raven ravenspo...@yahoo.com wrote:
It seems that everyone is running with Apache and gobs of memory
available. They cannot really get their heads around running web2py
out of the box in 64K.
So let me explain why this is
On Feb 11, 7:54 am, tiago almeida tiago.b.alme...@gmail.com wrote:
You mean 64MB, not 64K, I hope.
Oops! Yes, I do mean 64M :-)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
web2py-users group.
To post to this group, send email to web...@googlegroups.com.
To
You might try commenting out the lines in import_all.py if you're
running the source version. That way it doesn't load every module.
-tim
On 2/10/2010 9:06 PM, raven wrote:
Here are the details of memory usage when web2py is NOT running
top - 21:58:38 up 11:57, 2 users, load average:
This sounds interesting.
Instead of hacking around in import_all.py, I wonder if someone who
know what's what, could provide a stripped down version of this file -
or even an option to run with a stripped down version that only loads
the bare minimum?
On Feb 11, 8:49 am, Timothy Farrell
im us this script for check the memory usage of my aplications ... checkit...
http://gist.github.com/252585
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:34 AM, raven ravenspo...@yahoo.com wrote:
This sounds interesting.
Instead of hacking around in import_all.py, I wonder if someone who
know what's what,
You probably can't even fit the process scheduler of a modern OS in
64k.
Unless you want to code your apps on bare metal (no OS) assembly
language, there is no way you'll get any higher level language in
64k. Even then, toss out the notions of a database, transactions,
concurrency, and
you just comment import import_all from main web2py should still work
but will choke later if an app requests a module that does not fit in
memory. Anyhow, modules do not take that much space.
On Feb 11, 8:34 am, raven ravenspo...@yahoo.com wrote:
This sounds interesting.
Instead of hacking
I don't see how you are running any system on 64MB (unless it is DOS
or some really really old linux version... maybe gentoo... maybe. )
You won't be able to run web2py on this system. Either upgrade the
system or get a shared hosting service.
-Thadeus
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:18 PM,
I commented out the line
import gluon.import_all
from web2py.py.
This seemed to help a lot! I now have free memory, just a little, and
the % memory used was halved.
My little application runs fine, so far.
top - 13:33:31 up 1 day, 3:32, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00,
0.00
Tasks: 14
Oops! Yes, I do mean 64M :-)
64Mb ...holy smoke!! My hoster wouldn't even sell me less than 256Mb.
I was doubtful there would be much financial point to this quest for
minimal memory, but a quick google later, I came up with this...
http://www.ramhost.us/ only $2.99 per month, and I pay
How about web2py in a VPS using less than 40MB RAM?
You can reduce web2py memory usage by using a newer generation web
server with web2py instead of the internal web server with web2py.
Apache gets trashed in tests by newer generation web servers such as
lightttpd and nginx. Apache also uses far
I only use lightttpd for static pages and to remap URLs.
Plus a UNIX socket between lighttpd and web2py to service web2py
requests through FastCGI.
John Heenan
On Feb 12, 8:59 am, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
How about web2py in a VPS using less than 40MB RAM?
You can reduce
Yes the instructions are confusing.
Following are sections from my /etc/lighttpd/lighttpd.conf file. I
have edited sections to remove irrelevant detail.
The lighttpd remaps help to avoid ugly URLs. I don't use a routes.py
file but the zgus app does include some helpers to avoid ugly URLs
(this
Thanks for the details on modifying the lighttpd configuration file.
Actually, I am pretty confident about doing this, having modified it
to connect to fossil.
However, I am confused by fcgihandler.py
It says:
This file has to be in the PYTHONPATH
What does this mean? The file has to be
My fcgihandler.py equivalent file is in the the same directory as
web2py.py
My init.d startup script changes to this directory before running
fcgihanfdler.py with Python.
I don't make any separate changes to PYTHONPATH.
The web2py FastCGI server needs to know where the UNIX socket is. This
is
On Feb 12, 9:59 am, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
How about web2py in a VPS using less than 40MB RAM?
You can reduce web2py memory usage by using a newer generation web
server with web2py instead of the internal web server with web2py.
Not really.
Apache gets trashed in tests
Hello Graham, whoever you are.
You sound highly confused, clueless aboout how to present objective
data and a fairly typical bombastic nerd of the type that clogs up and
plagues forums.
Get a life
John Heenan
On Feb 12, 11:32 am, Graham Dumpleton graham.dumple...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Feb 12,
On Feb 12, 1:04 pm, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Graham, whoever you are.
You sound highly confused, clueless aboout how to present objective
data and a fairly typical bombastic nerd of the type that clogs up and
plagues forums.
Get a life
I think you will find that I
Where is the perspective?
1) Even with an 'ideal configuration that does not use MPM pre-
forking, Apache still uses threads to service each request (for static
files). This is still more inefficient than lightttpd and nginx that
use an event model.
2) No one is going to take anyone seriously
From the confused manner Graham is conducting himself, he appears to
think web2py runs as a process of a web server with threads that
belong to the web server. This is not correct. web2py always runs as
an independent process, unless web2py uses its internal web server.
An external web server
On Feb 12, 1:44 pm, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
Where is the perspective?
1) Even with an 'ideal configuration that does not use MPM pre-
forking, Apache still uses threads to service each request (for static
files). This is still more inefficient than lightttpd and nginx that
On Feb 12, 2:00 pm, John Heenan johnmhee...@gmail.com wrote:
From the confused manner Graham is conducting himself, he appears to
think web2py runs as a process of a web server with threads that
belong to the web server. This is not correct. web2py always runs as
an independent process,
For lower memory footprint on a tight VPS I do not believe any
configuration of Apache with web2py (using mod_wgsi or otherwise) will
beat a good lighttpd configuration with a FastCGI UNIX socket
interface to web2py.
I also believe trying to argue otherwise without credible benchmarks
is liable
Thank you for your answer.
1. The memory needed by the OS does not count, because I am using a
virtual private server.
2. I am using web2py 'out of the box' with its own server, not
apache.
On Feb 10, 2:36 pm, Thadeus Burgess thade...@thadeusb.com wrote:
For one, you have two requirements,
Are you sure. Usually VPS includes the OS.
On Feb 10, 2:23 pm, raven ravenspo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Thank you for your answer.
1. The memory needed by the OS does not count, because I am using a
virtual private server.
2. I am using web2py 'out of the box' with its own server, not
apache.
Here are the details of memory usage when web2py is NOT running
top - 21:58:38 up 11:57, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Tasks: 10 total, 1 running, 9 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi,
0.0%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 65536k
62 matches
Mail list logo
