[Web-SIG] WSGI 2.0
manlio_perillo at libero.it
Thu Oct 4 18:58:50 CEST 2007
Phillip J. Eby ha scritto:
> At 06:37 PM 10/4/2007 +0200, Manlio Perillo wrote:
>> To make an example (not tested), suppose that a WSGI application keeps a
>> global counter (as a thread specific data).
>> When a new request arrives, the counter is reset to 0, and its value is
>> incremented for every iteration.
>> With all the existing WSGI implementation (as far as I know), we always
>> know the current value of the counter: it will start at 0, reach the
>> number of iterations, and then will start at 0 again.
> So? An application that does this is obviously broken. Again, remember
> that the WSGI spec encourages interleaving, so any multi-threaded server
> is well within its rights to do the same thing.
> There is nothing in WSGI that says multiple simultaneous requests cannot
> be run in the same thread. Therefore, nothing is guaranteed about what
> happens to global or thread-local resources while the application (or
> its returned iterable) is not actually executing.
But why you are against adding a new environ value (not necessary named
wsgi.asynchronous), that will explicitly state if the WSGI server will
interleave the WSGI application?
Regards Manlio Perillo
More information about the Web-SIG