I'm using nginx + fastcgi
( manage.py runfcgi ...) on production for some of my Django projects. A lot of people suggests to use nginx + gunicorn
. What is advantage of using gunicorn instead of using Django's fastcgi
server?
相关问题
- Django __str__ returned non-string (type NoneType)
- Django & Amazon SES SMTP. Cannot send email
- Django check user group permissions
- Django restrict pages to certain users
- UnicodeEncodeError with attach_file on EmailMessag
相关文章
- Profiling Django with PyCharm
- Why doesn't Django enforce my unique_together
- MultiValueDictKeyError in Django admin
- Override env values defined in container spec
- Django/Heroku: FATAL: too many connections for rol
- Django is sooo slow? errno 32 broken pipe? dcramer
- Django: Replacement for the default ManyToMany Wid
- Upgrading transaction.commit_manually() to Django
I'm just tell why you need to use WSGI-like servers :) but if you feel comfortable with using fcgi - just use it
Short answer: WSGI (as protocol) is cool because its native
Or if "You need to go deeper"(c)
Next question "FastCGI vs WSGI-like servers?"
Some answers here:
About gunicorn, uWSGI and cherokee, nginx. Dont mix them!
nginx is web-server which can handle http requests and can send it to WSGI backend. ( But first of all it extremly fast for static content handling. ) And WSGI backend handle you django application.
About cherokee, I think it handle the same tasks as nginx but I'm not work with it.
And gunicorn, uWSGI are WSGI backend which run threads with django app and do many other tasks
And hmmm, gunicorn say that
I practice for my django apps nginx (latest stable from nginx.org repos)+uWSGI (from Debian stables) - works perfectly :)
edited 18.05.2012
Link to 2010 topic with comparing fcgi gunicorn uWSGI
As b1- says, WSGI is native (take a look at this post).
Also, this post has a similar question.
From my personal point of view, some time ago i've been using Nginx + uwsg in vhost mode to run various project on my server.