Hacker News Reader

Comment by sirn | Hacker News Reader

I was using Nginx for static files and a reverse proxy (+balancer) to CherryPy until recently. Now switched to Nginx + uWSGI for everything and couldn't be happier. Nginx is very fast, even when on-the-fly Gzip is enabled.

View on HN

I'm currently running Nginx+CherryPy and I'm if you'd like to comment on why you switched to uWSGI, what you gained and if you'd recommend it?

I haven't used CherryPy, but run Cherokee+uWSGI for Django and uWSGI is fast, handles load well, and has a very small memory footprint.

Basically I was running CherryPy with supervisord+memmon since the application is a bit faulty. uWSGI alone can replace the whole stack: it comes with its own process manager, memory monitor and has Harakiri mode to monitor a process that is taking too long to response.

Initial setup was super tricky (Nginx in FreeBSD port doesn't ship with uWSGI support and XML config somehow doesn't work, so I have to use Python config which the documentation is lacking) but it has been doing its job ever since.

uWSGI is fast, has low memory footprint (a bit above Gevent/FAPWS) and is very reliable by itself. I'd recommend you to at least try it. The uWSGI documentation[1] was what got me interested.

[1]: http://projects.unbit.it/uwsgi/wiki/Doc

(By the way, I use a patch on this Chinese blog: http://www.indexofire.com/blog/?p=605 to build Nginx with uWSGI support on a FreeBSD. I made this: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37857 for running on Arch. /shameless plug)

Thanks. Installing the AUR package as I'm typing this.

Ah, I didn't mentioned in the AUR, but you will still need to install python-uwsgi for uwsgi binary.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com