[Web-SIG] A query for hosting providers

[Lloyd Kvam]

Speaking as a Tummy.com customer, I have a virtualized linux server.  My
processes are isolated from Tummy's other clients on that piece of
hardware at the OS level.  I still face the same issues with
long-running processes, but at least it is all from code that I maintain
on a server image that I manage.  If I had competing processes that were
hard to reconcile, I'd probably just get another virtual server from
Tummy.

On Sun, 2005-03-27 at 17:49, Ian Bicking wrote:
> I'm wondering -- and this is mostly directed to the hosting providers 
> (Remi, Sean...) -- what are the problems with providing commodity-level 
> hosting for Python programs?  I can think of some, but I'm curious what 
> you've encountered and if you have ideas about how to improve things.
> 
> Some things I've thought about:
> * Long running processes are hard to maintain (assuming we rule out 
> CGI).  Code becomes stale, maybe the server process gets in a bad state. 
>    Sometimes processes becomes wedged.  With mod_python this can effect 
> the entire site.
> * Isolating clients from each other can be difficult.  For mod_python 
> I'm assuming each client needs their own Apache server.  Maybe this 
> isn't as much of a problem these days, as virtualizing technologies have 
> improved, and multiple Apache processes isn't that big of a deal.
> * Setup of frameworks is all over the place.  Setting up multiple 
> frameworks might be even more difficult.  Some of them may depend on 
> mod_rewrite.  Server processes are all over the place as well.
> 
> But I don't have a real feeling for how to solve these, and I'm sure 
> there's things I'm not thinking about.  How do you guys do it now, and 
> if you could change this stuff -- on any level, from interpreter to 
> framework -- what would you do?
-- 
Lloyd Kvam
Venix Corp