Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
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?
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