|
Jim Gallacher
jpg at jgassociates.ca
Wed Jul 19 08:24:43 EDT 2006
wang yingqi wrote: > First of all,Thank you very much!:) > Additionally,Someone tell me we can share session via Apache service > between > different web apps, Probably not. If the web app has a standalone server that can be run without mod_python it will only be using the the mod_python version to get access to a python interpreter embedded in apache. Thus it will not likely be using the mod_python session code and providing it's own session code instead. Also, session data used by different apps is likely to be different and incompatible as well. > and the four points you mentioned are the best > argumatation for choose Apache + Mod_python instead of standalone mode. > So,Maybe the development process is a loop like this,Coding and Debuging at > standalone mode ,Publishing on Apache with mod_python. That seems reasonable. Jim > > On 7/18/06, Jim Gallacher <jpg at jgassociates.ca> wrote: >> >> wang yingqi wrote: >> > hi everyone! >> > some excellent python web framework has its own web-service >> instance,Just >> > like Quixote & Djanso, that means we can run our web service without >> Apache >> > etc. >> > so could anybody tell me what's the difference between these >> modes:1,run >> > the >> > service standalone of the python web framework 2,attach the python web >> app >> > to Apache via mod_python.. >> > thank u! >> >> Consider the following points: >> >> 1. Performance >> >> The standalone servers will serve all content, including static content. >> Since they are likely written in pure python, their performance for >> static content likely be slower. >> >> Whether this is an important factor will depend on the mix of static vs >> dynamic content. If the ratio of static/dynamic is high, using apache + >> mod_python will likely be better. >> >> 2. Server management >> >> If the host is not running apache, it will be easier to use the >> standalone server. >> >> If the host is already running apache, it may be simpler to use >> mod_python rather than managing a separate application server. >> >> If the user wants multiple instances of the application, they will need >> to run and manage additional standalone servers, as opposed to apache >> where it will just be an extra configuration stanza. >> >> There is also the issue of contention for port 80. What if you need >> different standalone application servers such as Trac for issue tracking >> and Quixote for some other web service. Only one of them will be able to >> use port 80, while the other will need to use a non-standard port. This >> could be a PITA, and indeed some corporate users may not be able to >> access the second application due to firewall restrictions. >> >> 3. Virtual hosts >> >> The standalone server may not support virtual hosts. To me this would be >> a show stopper. >> >> 4. Apache goodness >> >> There are a wealth of apache modules which may be useful, with no >> equivalent in the standalone server. >> >> Apache is robust. Some applications (such as Zope) recommend that the >> Zope server be used behind apache as an extra bit of insurance against >> the malicious requests. (Or at least this used to be the recommendation. >> I don't follow Zope development anymore and this may have changed). >> >> These comments may seem biased towards Apache, but then consider the >> source - mod_python is an Apache module after all. ;) >> >> Jim >> >
|