http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2502 Glad to help out a fellow Cherokee and Gentoo user. :) I could use some help testing those ebuilds (although as noted I am running it on the server which I posted the tarball to), as I can only really test on one machine at the moment (a x86_64 Dell PowerEdge 1950 server), so any help there would be appreciated, especially on other arches. Thanks for the help! -- Ayron Jungren Cisco Certified Networking Professional, Zend Certified Engineer (PHP5) Ivo Ugrina wrote: Ayron Jungren 2008-12-04T02:15:56 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2501 Thanks! If u need any help with ebuild, testing, ... feel free to ask. Have fun, Ivo Ugrina 2008-12-03T23:10:31 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2500 _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list Cherokee< at >lists.octality.com http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee Ayron Jungren 2008-12-03T20:08:19 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2499 Ubuntu Debs for Intrepid and Hardy done at : https://launchpad.net/~cherokee-webserver/+archive Saludos Leonel leonel 2008-12-03T14:29:44 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2498 Woww, what an impressive speed of response! BTW, do you know something about this bug? http://code.google.com/p/cherokee/issues/detail?id=223 Cheers! -- Octality http://www.octality.com/ Alvaro Lopez Ortega 2008-12-03T12:03:12 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2497 Hello Angel, Did you read the message I sent? http://lists.octality.com/pipermail/cherokee/2008-December/ 009424.html That message outlines the solution to the problem. I hope it's useful for you. Cheers! On 03-dic-08, at 12:46, Angel Berríos Dávila wrote: -- Greetings, alo http://www.alobbs.com/ Alvaro Lopez Ortega 2008-12-03T11:59:36 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2496 Available in FreeBSD ports: www/cherokee Cheers, Beech Beech Rintoul 2008-12-03T11:55:07 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2495 Hi. Maybe i forgot to introduce myself. I am Angel Berríos a IT consultant that specialize in open source solutions. I have a small company in Puerto Rico where I deliver services for the government and private companies. Let me start by congratulate you for this extraordinary project and your contributions to the community. I recently read an article in howtoforge web site and decided to take a peek of Cherokee after reading about the amazing benchmarks and reviews shown at the community web site. I was not able to find a forum or other knowledge base (wiki) for the question that I have. I do not even know if I am posting in the right mail list, but please advise me where to post if that is the case. Any help for setting this will be greatly appreciate. On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 10:11 -0400, Angel Berríos Dávila wrote: Angel Berríos Dávila 2008-12-03T11:46:33 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2494 =========================== Cherokee 0.11.3 released! =========================== Cherokee is a very fast, flexible and easy to configure Web Server. It supports the widespread technologies nowadays: FastCGI, SCGI, PHP, CGI, TLS and SSL encrypted connections, Virtual hosts, Authentication, on the fly encoding, Apache compatible log files, HTTP Load Balancing, Data Base Balancing, SSI, Reverse HTTP Proxy and much more. Cherokee also provides an easy to use configuration interface that allows to configure the server from top to bottom without having to edit a text configuration file. Please visit the Cherokee Web Server site for more information: http://www.cherokee-project.com/ Availability ------------ - Main site: http://ftp.cherokee-project.com/0.11/0.11.3/cherokee-0.11.3.tar.gz MD5 (cherokee-0.11.3.tar.gz) = 79cf97c4a3de24fdfe8a63766d9d1bc2 - Mirrors: Belgium - ftp://ftp.easynet.be/cherokee/ Ireland - htt Alvaro Lopez Ortega 2008-12-03T10:47:12 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2493 Hi :) On Tuesday 02 December 2008 17:18:52, Mario César wrote: Done! Thanks for reporting your findings ;) Congratulations!! Taher Shihadeh 2008-12-03T09:17:10 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2492 Thanks for reporting back! Indeed it would. Congrats Mario, it's been a very good catch! :-) -- Octality http://www.octality.com/ Alvaro Lopez Ortega 2008-12-02T16:29:58 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2491 I finally solved my issue !!! :D I am soooooo embarrassed :-S Was a really silly thing, I was reading the runfastcgi method of django, and notice that runs with the daemonize option by default, I wasn't running with daemonize on my scripts so it keeps running under cherokee or something like that, but not being fully detach. I change the option to daemonize=true and all was solved. :D I think it would be fine if in the documentation to be explicit that the scripts for the Information Sources has to be daemonized, I guess is the case for all. Here it is the correct script to deploy django in cherokee, using ports or unix sockets http://dpaste.com/hold/95410/ , works fine the both ways. Best regards for everyone, and thanks very much for all the interest. I am glad to said that I am officially had fully migrate to Cherokee on my servers, yeeees!! :D Mario César 2008-12-02T16:18:52 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2490 My head is using N-(4-hydroxyphenyl)acetamide too often in the recent weeks. It might be an new memory loss medicine :\ Stefan Stefan de Konink 2008-12-02T10:25:21 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2489 Are you over 40? You seem to suffer from short term memory loss. This can be corrected, however .. I recommend shock treatments. Up the voltage :) Cheers, --Tim Tim Post 2008-12-02T10:17:40 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2488 When, Where, What?! Stefan Stefan de Konink 2008-12-02T10:05:37 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2487 After reading the whole discussion and having a look at the thread we had in the past, I was about to take part in the conversation since I would be a part of the aluded Cherokee community. Main topic was going to be the nature of passive-agressive discussions and the poor role they played in improving the understanding between parts. However, after reading Tim Post's last paragraphs I have totally disregarded the 'taking parts' option. Kudos, Tim :-D Now I'm going to get some work done. It's going to be a long day :) On Tuesday 02 December 2008 09:39:34, Tim Post wrote: Taher Shihadeh 2008-12-02T09:08:59 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2486 I have found that a great number of people in the FLOSS community are simply just blunt. I don't think that most of them intend to be unproductively critical, in fact they are usually trying to be helpful. Using things like lists we are without the benefit of voice inflections, facial expressions and the like. Other times, hobby 'dev time' and beer time happen to fall in the same hours. At last I checked, the results of mixing the two were undefined. I have sent code to Stefan to play with because I expect him to evaluate it and convey his thoughts in a very blunt and direct manner. He's yet to let me down :) Really, though, he's correct in a sense. If someone wanted to actually sit down, implement and maintain it .. it would be a whole new ball park. Yes.. there is this strange form of dyslexia that suddenly strikes some people when they attempt to turn off their computer using their thumb. If inflicted, the final location of said thumb is undefined ;) Really, if we expect others to be tolerant .. Tim Post 2008-12-02T08:39:34 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2485 On Dec 2, 5:39 pm, Alvaro Lopez Ortega <alv...< at >gnu.org> wrote: I would love to see a proper technical discussion why you feel that Cherokee is faster for Python web hosting and why it is more secure. In the past when information was provided it mischaracterised how Apache/mod_wsgi worked and all I have done is set the record straight by providing the technical information about how it actually worked and why at a technical level the claims don't really make sense. Even though I presented this technical information as part of the discussion there wasn't really any response to counter it. So, who is the one not wanting to discuss it? At the same time, there has been no acknowledgement of how it is all a pointless discussion anyway since the size of the Python web applications based on major frameworks means that the hosting layer is not where the bottleneck is. Issues of security also depend greatly on the context of what a user wants to do and who controls the system it runs on. This gets ignored as do Graham Dumpleton 2008-12-02T07:05:22 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2484 He's not promoting. He's explaining the technical differences. I'm sure you'd be more than welcome to do the same on Apache or mod_wsgi's mailing lists (if anyone is on there asking about Cherokee). The OP seems long gone anyway, so it seems to be the same people in this mod_wsgi discussion as the last one we had on this list. ;-) Graham seems to be the only one having a technical discussion it seems. Compare posts. He spends a lot more time talking about design details and implementation choices than the pro-Cherokee crowd. He's also been the only one to admit that neither Apache nor Cherokee are superior: choose whichever fits your needs best.* Why aren't you (Cherokee developers) addressing how you plan on supporting HTTP 100s? Why aren't you posting benchmarks showing how Cherokee+FastCGI+flup+Django is faster than Apache+mod_wsgi+Django? (or any Python web framework besides Django) Graham is posting lots and lots of useful information. Despite his excellent posts, I will still probably swi Michael Schurter 2008-12-02T06:57:19 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2483 Dude, *stop it*. Seriously. Independently of whether I personally think that mod_swgi is simply a pile, I haven't joined its mailing list to give off about it and promote Cherokee; have I? It'd be lame. Let's face it. It is plain and simple: ignore the Apache+mod_wsgi architectural madness for a second and make the real test. As I said, you will see that it is a much faster solution - and of course, more reliable and secure. But again, I don't think you are seeking any sort of technical discussion here; so cut the.. noise, please. -- Greetings, alo http://www.alobbs.com/ Alvaro Lopez Ortega 2008-12-02T06:39:32 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general/2482 On Dec 2, 4:31 pm, "Michael Schurter" <mich...< at >susens-schurter.com> wrote: I would concur that for the speed freaks, or those who like to prematurely optimise, this would be a more reasonable approach. Just remember my warning though that once you load up a large WSGI application, any reduction in underlying layers handling requests will not be that noticeable. This is because the bottleneck will be the applications Python code or database queries. So, possibly also just a waste of time. That said, I have myself looked at C extension module for Python that would talk the Apache/mod_wsgi socket wire protocol so as to allow alternate variant of mod_wsgi daemon mode. The intent here would be to allow daemon to be a proper fork/exec of distinct 'python' executable. The reason for this would be to allow use of different installations/ versions of Python. Thus Apache/mod_wsgi would be able to cover embedded, forked daemon (current daemon mode), or a forked/execed daemon mode (like true fastcgi). Adding this Graham Dumpleton 2008-12-02T06:31:21 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.comp.web.cherokee.general