Apache + mod_wsgi / Lighttpd + wsgi - am I going to see differences in performance?_问答_开发者

I'm a newbie to developing with Python and I'm piecing together the information I need to make intelligent choices in two other open questions. (This isn't a duplicate.)

I'm not developing using a framework but building a web app from scratch using the gevent library. As far as front-end web servers go, it seems I have three choices: nginx, apache, and lighttpd.

From 开发者_JAVA百科all accounts that I've read, nginx's mod_wsgi isn't suitable.

That leaves two choices - lighttpd and Apache. Under heavy load, am I going to see major differences in performance and memory consumption characteristics? I'm under the impression Apache tends to be memory hungry even when not using prefork, but I don't know how suitable lighttp is for Python apps.

Are there any caveats or benefits to using lighttpd over apache? I really want to hear all the information you can possibly bore me with!

Apache...

Apache is by far the most widely used web server out there. Which is a good thing. There is so much more information on how to do stuff with it, and when something goes wrong there are a lot of people who know how to fix it. But, it is also the slowest out of the box; requring a lot of tweaking and a beefier server than Lighttpd. In your case, it will be a lot easier to get off the ground using Apache and Python. There are countless AMP packages out there, and many guides on how to setup python and make your application work. Just a quick google search will get you on your way. Under heavy load, Lighttpd will outshine Apache, but Apache is like a train. It just keeps chugging along.

Pros

Wide User Base
Universal support
A lot of plugins

Cons

Slow out of the box
Requires performance tweaking
Memory whore (No way you could get it working on a 64MB VPS)

Lighttpd...

Lighttpd is the new kid on the block. It is fast, powerful, and kicks ass performance wise (not to mention use like no memory). Out of the box, Lighttpd wipes the floor with Apache. But, not as many people know Lighttpd, so getting it to work is harder. Yes, it is the second most used webserver, but it does not have as much community support behind it. If you look here, on stackoverflow, there is this dude who keeps asking about how to get his Python app working but nobody has helped him. Under heavy load, if configured correctly, Lighttpd will out preform Apache (I did some tests a while back, and you might see a 200-300% performance increase in requests per second).

Pros

Fast out of the box
Uses very little memory

Cons

Not as much support as Apache
Sometimes just does not work

Nginx If you were running a static website, then you would use nginx. you are correct in saying nginx's mod_wsgi isn't suitable.

Conclusion Benefits? There are both web servers; designed to be able to replace one another. If both web servers are tuned correctly and you have ample hardware, then there is no real benefit of using one over another. You should try and see which web server meets your need, but asking me; I would say go with Lighttpd. It is, in my opinion, easier to configure and just works.

Also, You should look at Cherokee Web Server. Mad easy to set up and, the performance aint half bad. And you should ask this on Server Fault as well.

That you have mentioned gevent is important. Does that mean you are specifically trying to implement a long polling application? If you are and that functionality is the bulk of the application, then you will need to put your gevent server behind a front end web server that is implemented using async techniques rather that processes/threading model. Lighttd is an async server and fits that bill whereas Apache isn't. So use of Apache isn't good as front end proxy for long polling application. If that is the criteria though, would actually suggest you use nginx rather than Lighttpd.

Now if you are not doing long polling or anything else that needs high concurrency for long running requests, then you aren't necessarily going to gain too much by using gevent, especially if intention is to use a WSGI layer on top. For WSGI applications, ultimately the performance difference between different servers is minimal because your application is unlikely to be a hello world program that the benchmarks all use. The real bottlenecks are not the server but your application code, database, external callouts, lack of caching etc etc. In light of that, you should just use whatever WSGI hosting mechanism you find easier to use initially and when you properly work out what the hosting requirements are for your application, based on having an actual real application to test, then you can switch to something more appropriate if necessary.

In summary, you are just wasting your time trying to prematurely optimize by trying to find what may be the theoretically best server when in practice your application is what you should be concentrating on initially. After that, you also should be looking at application monitoring tools, because without monitoring tools how are you even going to determine if one hosting solution is better than another.