3 ms·
I think in Django's case, it's not so much "this is insecure", but more that runserver is simple/stupid and hasn't been built or tested for serving multiple con
by ra 14y ago
I think in Django's case, it's not so much "this is insecure", but more that runserver is simple/stupid and hasn't been built or tested for serving multiple concurrent users.
Nor should it be. There are plenty of WSGI capable web servers that can be installed into a Django project as apps.
If you want to run just Django behind a frontside cache and server static media from the same connection, simply install an appropriate app. Gunicorn and cherrypy both 'drop in replacements' for the built in runserver and both well up to the task.
- gojomo 14y agoYes, but I wasn't talking about the admonitions against runserver -- I was talking about the admonitions against the staticfiles app. I propose that staticfiles under gunicorn is a reasonable choice. Further, if fronted by a inbound proxy cache, it could perhaps even be the reference/recommended setup for high-volume production sites, rather than the current doctrine that such sites should have some extra static-collect/export to a helper server.