But it is not *much* more simple te serve it directly from the web server? >From my point of view ti would be a unnecessary overhead to the python interpreter.
Just my two cents! :) On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 8:49 AM, xrfang <[email protected]> wrote: > > But why? my suggestion is: instead of a fixed /statics/, why not > offer a list of path (patterns) which will be served directly (or > simplehttphandler of webpy)? > > On Nov 2, 10:26 am, Anand Chitipothu <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 4:51 AM, xrfang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > but, what is the flaw of my suggestion? See the original post, item > > > 1). :) > > > > If you do that all the requests will be handled like static files and > > your app will never get control. > > > > > BTW, is there any performance (or resource) penalty to let webpy > > > handle static file (especially large downloads) instead of let the web > > > server handle it? > > > > Yes. > > > -- -- Leon Waldman SysAdmin Linux - Arquiteto de Infra-Estrutura & TI. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web.py" 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/webpy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
