On Feb 15, 2006, at 8:10 AM, ToddG wrote:
> While Apache+FCGI might likely be the most common, I
think lots of
> people would/will also be interested in using
Apache+mod_proxy to a
> standalone backend -- would using `paster serve...` be
the backend to
> use for that? Also, in such a setup is it generally a
good idea to
> setup something akin to daemontools to monitor that
process? Or not
> really needed?
Yes, paster serve could handle that fine. paster serve
actually uses
BaseHTTPServer with some minor patches for better HTTP
compliance. I
would highly recommend using daemontools or supervise to
monitor it
if it was a critical production site.
I think Apache+SCGI and Lighty + FCGI/SCGI would be primary
concerns
for the deployment doc, with mod_proxy also being mentioned.
It's
somewhat hard for me to know exactly what are the main
points of
confusion when using these deployment options, probably
because I've
been doing this so long it just comes naturally.
In the case of mod_proxy, its possible/likely that you will
be
determining the 'mount' point for the webapp in Apache
config, ie,
you proxy under /yourapp to the Pylons app. Pylons does
support a
'prefix' option specifically to handle this case, which I
doubt
anyone is aware of. So documenting mod_proxy is definitely
on my to-
do list. 
The main objective I have behind putting official docs on
the site
documenting the deployment is not that there's a
'how-to', as wiki
recipies seem to handle that, more that there is a
'reference'
deployment for a Pylons application. I should also note
since paster
is the run throwing up flup/etc, these deployment documents
will
actually apply to any Paste using web application.
Cheers,
Ben
|