At Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:30:28 +0200,
Stefan J. Betz wrote:
> [1 <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>]
> Am 2009-10-18 11:48:15 -0700, victor.pantoja schrieb:
> > We are migrating a something complex system from Java to Python and we
> > are thinking about choosing CherryPy as our framework.
> > My doubt: does cherrypy stand +/- 4 million users and +/- 250
> > thousands simultaneous access?
> > Of course we are talking about using a very large cache structure
> > (memcached), WSGI and apache.
> I never tried CherryPy with so much Users/Connections...
> But i know of a Portal Software (http://www.ubuntuusers.de) which has
> choosen "Werkzeug" as Basic Framework: http://werkzeug.pocoo.org
> mfg Betz Stefan
My guess is that it is not necessarily CherryPy that would be difficult to use as much as the underlying systems the application being served would be using. For example, if you had that many simultaneous connections, you'd most likely need to have a set of CherryPy servers running. Each server would most likely have some sense of global state whether that is a session or something else. That system is more likely going to be the one that needs to be very fast or handle other scaling requirements. This means considering things like the db connections, file locking/unlocking and a host of other details that might cause issues.
What I can say for sure is that in terms of application development and stability , CherryPy is really well designed and makes it very well suited for building scalable systems. That may or may not mean it would work for your situation, but if your thinking of trying something like a WSGI based server (ie Werkzeug, Paste, CherryPy), then CherryPy is a great place to start.
HTH,
Eric Larson
> --
> Betz Stefan -- Webdesign & Computerservice
> URL:
http://www.stefan-betz.net > Mail: i
...@stefan-betz.net
> [2 Digital signature <application/pgp-signature (7bit)>]
|
