Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #26928 > unrolled thread

Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers? Gilles <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-08-12 02:03 +0200
    Re: Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers? Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> - 2012-08-12 07:56 +0200
      Re: Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers? Gilles <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-08-12 22:52 +0200
        Re: Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers? Tim Golden <mail@timgolden.me.uk> - 2012-08-12 22:26 +0100
          Re: Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers? Gilles <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-08-13 13:28 +0200
    Re: Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers? Gilles <nospam@nospam.com> - 2012-08-16 16:01 +0200
      Re: Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers? Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2012-08-16 12:59 -0700

#26928 — Running Python web apps on shared ASO servers?

Hello

I use A Small Orange (ASO) as my web provider. Asking the question in
their forum so far didn't work, so I figured I might have a faster
answer by asking here.

Support replied this in an old thread: "Just a CGI option. We don't
have enough users to justify adding mod_python support."
http://forums.asmallorange.com/topic/4672-python-support/page__hl__python
http://forums.asmallorange.com/topic/4918-python-fcgi-verses-mod-python/

Does it mean that ASO only supports writing Python web apps as
long-running processes (CGI, FCGI, WSGI, SCGI) instead of embedded
Python à la PHP?

If that's the case, which smallest tool would you recomment to write
basic apps, eg. handling forms, etc.?

Thank you.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#26937

Gilles <nospam@nospam.com> writes:

> ...
> Support replied this in an old thread: "Just a CGI option. We don't
> have enough users to justify adding mod_python support."
> http://forums.asmallorange.com/topic/4672-python-support/page__hl__python
> http://forums.asmallorange.com/topic/4918-python-fcgi-verses-mod-python/
>
> Does it mean that ASO only supports writing Python web apps as
> long-running processes (CGI, FCGI, WSGI, SCGI) instead of embedded
> Python à la PHP?

It looks as if you could use CGI to activate Python scripts.
There seems to be no mod_python" support.

You should probably read the mentioned forum resources to learn
details about the Python support provided by your web site hoster.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26954

On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 07:56:26 +0200, Dieter Maurer
<dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
>You should probably read the mentioned forum resources to learn
>details about the Python support provided by your web site hoster.

Yup, but so far, no answer, so I figured someone here might now.

Those articles seem to indicate that CGI isn't a good solution when
mod_python isn't available, so it looks like I'll have to investigate
FastCGI, WSGI, etc.

http://docs.python.org/howto/webservers.html
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/219110/how-python-web-frameworks-wsgi-and-cgi-fit-together

Thank you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26955

On 12/08/2012 21:52, Gilles wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 07:56:26 +0200, Dieter Maurer
> <dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
>> You should probably read the mentioned forum resources to learn
>> details about the Python support provided by your web site hoster.
>
> Yup, but so far, no answer, so I figured someone here might now.
>
> Those articles seem to indicate that CGI isn't a good solution when
> mod_python isn't available

Just to make a point: one person's "isn't a good solution" is another 
person's "works perfectly well for me". Modern servers are really quite 
quick: the cost of starting up a Python process and generating an HTML 
page can be really quite low. I've certainly had low-traffic production 
websites running for years on CGI without anyone complaining.

If speed was an issue or if I thought that I'd be getting more requests 
than I am then I'd consider a more sophisticated solution.

TJG

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26978

On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 22:26:19 +0100, Tim Golden <mail@timgolden.me.uk>
wrote:
>Just to make a point: one person's "isn't a good solution" is another 
>person's "works perfectly well for me". Modern servers are really quite 
>quick: the cost of starting up a Python process and generating an HTML 
>page can be really quite low. I've certainly had low-traffic production 
>websites running for years on CGI without anyone complaining.

Thanks Tim for the input. I'll try the different solutions available
and see if CGI is good enough for my needs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27165

On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 02:03:33 +0200, Gilles <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>Does it mean that ASO only supports writing Python web apps as
>long-running processes (CGI, FCGI, WSGI, SCGI) instead of embedded
>Python à la PHP?

I need to get the big picture about the different solutions to run a
Python web application.

From what I read, it seems like this is the way things involved over
the years:

CGI : original method. Slow because the server has to spawn a new
process to run the interpreter + script every time a script is run.

mod_python : Apache module alternative to CGI. The interpreter is
loaded once, and running a script means just handling the script

mod_wsgi : mod_python is no longer developped, and mod_wsgi is its new
reincarnation

FastCGI and SCGI: Faster alternativees to CGI; Run as independent
programs, and communicate with the web server through either a Unix
socket (located on the same host) or a TCP socket (remote  host)

Is this correct?

Thank you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27198

On 8/16/2012 7:01 AM Gilles said...
> On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 02:03:33 +0200, Gilles <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>> Does it mean that ASO only supports writing Python web apps as
>> long-running processes (CGI, FCGI, WSGI, SCGI) instead of embedded
>> Python à la PHP?
>
> I need to get the big picture about the different solutions to run a
> Python web application.
>
>>From what I read, it seems like this is the way things involved over
> the years:
>
> CGI : original method. Slow because the server has to spawn a new
> process to run the interpreter + script every time a script is run.
>
> mod_python : Apache module alternative to CGI. The interpreter is
> loaded once, and running a script means just handling the script
>
> mod_wsgi : mod_python is no longer developped, and mod_wsgi is its new
> reincarnation
>
> FastCGI and SCGI: Faster alternativees to CGI; Run as independent
> programs, and communicate with the web server through either a Unix
> socket (located on the same host) or a TCP socket (remote  host)
>
> Is this correct?
>
> Thank you.
>


I'm sure there's no single correct answer to this.

Consider (python 2.6]:

emile@paj39:~$ mkdir web
emile@paj39:~$ cd web
emile@paj39:~/web$ cat > test.html
hello from test.html
emile@paj39:~/web$ python -m SimpleHTTPServer

Then browse to localhost:8000/test.html

Emile

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web