Home Original page

[Python-Dev] multiple interpreters and extension modules

Bob Ippolito bob at redivi.com
Sat Dec 23 05:11:27 CET 2006 
On 12/23/06, Jeremy Kloth <jeremy.kloth at 4suite.org> wrote:
> On Friday 22 December 2006 7:54 pm, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> > It's a whole lot more practical to just stop using mod_python and go
> > for one of the other ways of exposing Python code to the internet. I
> > bet you can get the same or better performance out of another solution
> > anyway, and you'd save deployment headaches.
>
> I have no control over end-users choice of Python/webserver integration, I
> just end up making it possible to run our software in the environment of
> *their* choice.
>
> If it is the opinion that it is mod_python that is broken, I'd gladly point
> the users to the location stating that fact/belief.  It would make my life
> easier.

Well, it clearly is broken wrt pure python modules and objects that
persist across requests. I believe that it's also broken with any
extension that uses the PyGILState API due to the way it interacts
with multiple interpreters.

I stopped using mod_python years ago due to the sorts of issues that
you're bringing up here (plus problems compiling, deploying, RAM
bloat, etc.). I don't have any recent experience or references that I
can point you to, but I can definitely say that I have had many good
experiences with the WSGI based solutions (and Twisted, but that's a
different game).

I would at least advise your user that there are several perfectly
good ways to make Python speak HTTP, and mod_python is the only one
with this issue.

-bob
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list