[Catalog-sig] Proposal: Move PyPI static data to the cloud for better availability (version 2)

Ian Bicking ianb at colorstudy.com
Tue Jun 29 22:59:35 CEST 2010

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 3:50 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de>wrote:

> > * Move the PyPI installation to mod_wsgi (I believe it is using FCGI
> > now?)
> For the latter: correct.
> For the former (use mod_wsgi): I had actually implemented it, but needed
> to revert to FCGI, because mod_wsgi would cause too many hanging servers.

I'm surprised, what specific mod_wsgi configuration did you try?  I've had
good luck with a using a daemon process and making sure no process lives too
long.  There's another configuration of mod_wsgi that runs Python in the
Apache process, which I've never used and doesn't seem like a good idea to

> > This is largely work that would have to happen to move to a CDN, but
> > it's simpler (given how PyPI works now) and I believe will relieve most
> > of the problems we've seen.
> As for the switch to WSGI: it will *introduce* new problems.
> > PyPI right now is really quite reliable,
> > these small changes would I think be low-risk and less likely to
> > introduce new problems while addressing what I suspect is the source of
> > problems.
> I disagree that these are small and low-risk. The WSGI switch will risk
> stability; the others (generate static pages) will not be small, and
> risk correctness.

I don't really know how to describe "small" or "low-risk"... maybe I should
say "smaller" and "lesser-risk" than the full CDN proposal.

Ian Bicking  |  http://blog.ianbicking.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20100629/623c22b7/attachment.html>

More information about the Catalog-SIG mailing list