On 07/10/2007, Manlio Perillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Phillip J. Eby ha scritto: > > At 11:04 AM 10/6/2007 +0200, Manlio Perillo wrote: > >> As an example, the WSGI write callable cannot be implemented in a > >> conforming way in Nginx. > > > > ...unless you use a separate thread or process. > > > > I'm insisting about asynchronous support in WSGI because > Nginx *does not supports threads*. > > It has some thread support but it is *broken*. > Even if in future the problems are solved, the threading model of Nginx > *will break* many existing WSGI applications, since the WSGI iteration > can be resumed in different threads. > > Of course, a WSGI application can use threads, but i think that it > *needs* a wsgi.pause_output extension, for synchronization.
I appreciate that you can't use the thread support in nginx, but what I don't understand is why you can't utililise Python threading API (or even POSIX threads) at the boundary between nginx and the interface into the WSGI application, ie., in the WSGI adapter layer, so as to emulate a synchronous style WSGI interface on top of the nginx event driven layer. In other words you hide all the complexity of any queues or other synchronisation mechanisms for communicating any data between the two within the adapter. This way you do not need to expose an asynchronous API to the WSGI application itself and existing WSGI code can be used as is. Graham _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
