What's the benefit for aiohttp-wsgi + django?

[gera2ld]

It seems that aiohttp-wsgi just runs an application in an executor, which by default is just a thread pool, with a default pool size of 5 threads.

So if the application is designed with blocking APIs, such as flask and django, it will actually be executed via multi-threading and could not take advantage of co-routines. Then what's the benefit for using aiohttp-wsgi?

[etianen]

An excellent question!

If you're only going to use Django, then there's no real advantage over using any other wsgi server. A few minor advantages include:

• Pretty decent async static file server via aiohttp
• Ability to schedule background tasks as coroutines from the Django app using loop.create_task()

However, the main reason this library exists is that it allows you you run Django alongside an aiohttp application, allowing you to implement critical pieces of your app as async, but keep most of it inside Django.

On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 at 14:16, Gerald notifications@github.com wrote:

It seems that aiohttp-wsgi just runs an application in an executor, which by default is just a thread pool https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio-eventloop.html#executor, with a default pool size of 5 threads.

So if the application is designed with blocking APIs, such as flask and django, it will actually be executed via multi-threading and could not take advantage of co-routines. Then what's the benefit for using aiohttp-wsgi?

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/etianen/aiohttp-wsgi/issues/11, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJFCDxLwZi0_YdWNARG7C2o-stjDM4Aks5q0NIzgaJpZM4KXtES .

[gera2ld]

That makes sense. Thanks a lot!