in terms of speed?
i've never had an issue with speed for either. unless you are pushing
tons of stuff through, i doubt you would either.
in the end, unless speed is REALLY a factor, it comes down to, which
do you find easier to maintain.
i find proxied setups easier to maintain. i abhor setting up and
maintaing fastcgi, so the choice for me is always easy.
On Oct 8, 2008, at 4:44 AM, Phillip B Oldham wrote:
Nothing yet - was going to either use Paste/WebOb or web.py; looking
for benchmarks for the smaller frameworks. However, I'm not adverse
to using something a little different if its preferable for nginx. I
understand sockets are faster than TCP, but is fastcgi better than
upstream?
Sean Allen wrote:
do you have an upstream server such as cherrypy already setup?
if yes, that is going to be your fastest route.
On Oct 7, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Phillip B Oldham wrote:
Which would be fastest/preferable to connect nginx to python?
FastCGI (using Flup or similar) or the upstream module proxying to
an http server such as cherrypy?
<phill.vcf>
--
*Phillip B Oldham*
The Activity People
phi...@theactivitypeople.co.uk <mailto:phi...@theactivitypeople.co.uk>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Policies*
This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the above named
recipient(s) only and may be confidential. If they have come to you
in error, please reply to this e-mail and highlight the error. No
action should be taken regarding content, nor must you copy or show
them to anyone.
This e-mail has been created in the knowledge that Internet e-mail
is not a 100% secure communications medium, and we have taken steps
to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus.
We must advise that in keeping with good computing practice the
recipient should ensure they are completely virus free, and that you
understand and observe the lack of security when e-mailing us.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<phill.vcf>