hypnotoad vs uwsgi

Matija Papec

unread,

Sep 10, 2015, 9:24:37 AM9/10/15

to Mojolicious

I'm considering these two options in terms of scalability, so which should I consider when number of connections and not the speed is an issue?

Tia

Jan Henning Thorsen

unread,

Sep 11, 2015, 8:31:30 AM9/11/15

to Mojolicious

I don't see how uwsgi would give you anything extra. Can you explain?

When it comes to number of connections, you should make your application non-blocking. At work I went from 80+ workers to 8 after I changed from blocking code to non-blocking code. The reason is that Mojo::IOLoop is able to multiplex the database queries and the other I/O operations.

Hypnotoad also give you the ability to hot reload -- meaning you have zero downtime when reloading the application between upgrades.

Matija Papec

unread,

Sep 15, 2015, 4:08:45 AM9/15/15

to Mojolicious

On Friday, September 11, 2015 at 2:31:30 PM UTC+2, Jan Henning Thorsen wrote:

I don't see how uwsgi would give you anything extra. Can you explain?

I was thinking about PSGI binary protocol; and I'm not sure if uwsgi can handle more connections per single perl worker (nginx/uwsgi combo).

When it comes to number of connections, you should make your application non-blocking. At work I went from 80+ workers to 8 after I changed from blocking code to non-blocking code. The reason is that Mojo::IOLoop is able to multiplex the database queries and the other I/O operations.

Hypnotoad also give you the ability to hot reload -- meaning you have zero downtime when reloading the application between upgrades.

Thank you for sharing your experience. I guess I can leave out PSGI interface when using hypnotoad behind nginx.

Reply all

Reply to author

Forward