4 ms·

Looks super interesting. One of the things that I wanted to improve on are Gunicorn's latency and here: https://github.com/emmett-framework/granian/tree/master

Looks super interesting. One of the things that I wanted to improve on are Gunicorn's latency and here: https://github.com/emmett-framework/granian/tree/master/benchmarks https://github.com/emmett-framework/granian/tree/master/benc... shows way better latency for Granian. Kudos. just, when would you consider this good enough for production?

ddorian43 4y ago
No comparison with uwsgi in the link.
- manfre 4y ago
  It's unlikely for new projects to compare against uwsgi because "The project is in maintenance mode". https://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
  - dangrie158 4y ago
    So you mean feature complete and it only needs updates to fix bugs or security issues? Since it still is maintained (which is what maintenance mode means or not) why would you not include it in a comparison?
    - InvaderFizz 4y ago
      I would guess that people see "maintenance mode" and think that means it's pretty much EoL and will no longer receive security patches in the near future. That is certainly the mental model I have for something in maintenance mode.
      - Bjartr 4y ago
        To me the whole point of saying "maintenance mode" is to tell people to only expect things like necessary security patches and critical bug fixes instead of new features. If those things aren't happening, then there isn't any maintenance going on.
  - megaman821 4y ago
    I am going to still use it until something else catches up with it. uWSGI is fast and feature rich. As long as the maintainers address security issues as they pop up, it is still a good choice, even in maintenance mode.
    - rcarmo 4y ago
      Yep. The only thing I am missing from uWSGI right now is support for cgroups v2 so that I can limit CPU usage on a per-worker basis without fighting systemd.
gi0baro-dev 4y ago
Granian maintainer here. We have a couple of services in production at the company I work with, served with granian, they handles ~5k RPM traffic each (not so much) with no particular issues. You can consider the ASGI support quite robust for the current version, WSGI was introduced in 0.2.0, so it might still suffer from bugs. RSGI is quite new as a protocol, so next versions might introduce breaking changes (but the RSGI specification has a version, so you can stick with a specific revision), at least until version 1.0 will be ready.

ddorian43 4y ago

No comparison with uwsgi in the link.

manfre 4y ago
It's unlikely for new projects to compare against uwsgi because "The project is in maintenance mode". https://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
- dangrie158 4y ago
  So you mean feature complete and it only needs updates to fix bugs or security issues? Since it still is maintained (which is what maintenance mode means or not) why would you not include it in a comparison?
  - InvaderFizz 4y ago
    I would guess that people see "maintenance mode" and think that means it's pretty much EoL and will no longer receive security patches in the near future. That is certainly the mental model I have for something in maintenance mode.
    - Bjartr 4y ago
      To me the whole point of saying "maintenance mode" is to tell people to only expect things like necessary security patches and critical bug fixes instead of new features. If those things aren't happening, then there isn't any maintenance going on.
- megaman821 4y ago
  I am going to still use it until something else catches up with it. uWSGI is fast and feature rich. As long as the maintainers address security issues as they pop up, it is still a good choice, even in maintenance mode.
  - rcarmo 4y ago
    Yep. The only thing I am missing from uWSGI right now is support for cgroups v2 so that I can limit CPU usage on a per-worker basis without fighting systemd.

gi0baro-dev 4y ago

Granian maintainer here. We have a couple of services in production at the company I work with, served with granian, they handles ~5k RPM traffic each (not so much) with no particular issues. You can consider the ASGI support quite robust for the current version, WSGI was introduced in 0.2.0, so it might still suffer from bugs. RSGI is quite new as a protocol, so next versions might introduce breaking changes (but the RSGI specification has a version, so you can stick with a specific revision), at least until version 1.0 will be ready.