Well, I need pure speed.. 10K to 100K rps is what I do with avg response of 50ms. uWSGI with gevent for the 2.7 world was the way too awesome but not native and monkey patched...
So what I am seeing for 3.6 it that its between sonic and aiohttp and for heavy aysnc calls due to the native support for asyncio it seeks thats flask is not longer relevant..I also assume that uWSGI will support both... But a brief look at both ... both are by no strength of the imagination mature for supporting third party apps but thats OK I can write my self. So what I want to confirm that using aiohttp or sonic with uWSGI and asyncio with 3.6 with replace my 2.7 flask/bottle with uWSGI and the gevent loop Again I am flying blind with the new 3.6 frameworks and just seems that going forward flask is becoming antiquated in the async world for the new breed of asyncio frameworks.... Thanks for the help On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Curtis Maloney <[email protected]> wrote: > On 17/07/17 15:57, David Montgomery wrote: > >> >> Hi, >> >> I have used flask/bottle with nginx/uWSGI gevent loop with great success >> for 2.7 >> >> Its now time for me to move on up to 3.6 >> >> I see that uWSGI supports asyncio but does not appear that the use of >> asyncio with flask is heavily supported by the community >> >> What are the python 3.6 frameworks as closest top flask as possible that >> will use uWSGI asyncio? e.g. aiohttp? sanic? >> > > Well, the question really becomes, I guess, what do you use of Flask? > > As you've mentioned, aiohttp is well supported, and makes life quite easy > (I've used it a fair bit myself). > > A friend of mine is also developing APIstar ( > https://github.com/tomchristie/apistar ) if all you need is APIs. > > what is the uWSGI python that needs asyncio with 3.x using for a framework? >> > > I'm not clear what you're asking here... > > It appears that I can still use gevent with flask with python 3 but this >> is a monkey patch to force async wherase asyncio is native >> > > Gevent was always a monkey patch, and was frequently not the performance > panacea many people assumed it would be... too many jumped on the "OMG > async!" bandwagon, without properly understanding the implications. > > That said, if you found it worked for you, yes, you can keep using it. > > uWSGI also supports other loop engins: > > > http://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/uGreen.html > http://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Tornado.html > http://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/asyncio.html > > -- > Curtis > _______________________________________________ > uWSGI mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi >
_______________________________________________ uWSGI mailing list [email protected] http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi
