gunicorn VS Werkzeug

I'm hoping so – gunicorn has a long-open pull request that would fix `--reuse-port`, which currently does nothing

https://github.com/benoitc/gunicorn/pull/2938

However, I'm curious about the best way to deploy, specifically with regard to WSGI. I've tried using the raw eventlet WSGI server (`eventlet.wsgi.server(eventlet.listen(("", 8000)), application)`). I then start it with `python manage.py runserver`. This has worked okay, but I'm unsure about how scalable it is. It seems like the standard stack is Django + Gunicorn + NGINX. Based on `python-socketio` documentation, this should be possible. I tried django + eventlet + gunicorn, but it seems like gunicorn a) [doesn't play nice with eventlet](https://github.com/benoitc/gunicorn/pull/2581) and b) only supports one worker. Gevent + Gunicorn doesn't have this bug, but still only supports one worker. Also, I'm not sure how actively maintained gevent is. So I'm not sure how scalable either Gunicorn + eventlet or Gunicorn + geventlet is as a WSGI server. So I'm not sure if Gunicorn is my best bet, or if it's too limited.

For building your API, I recommend using the Flask library. It is very beginner-friendly, and you will be able to build a simple API in a matter of minutes! Keep in mind that, for a more serious project, you should definitely use something like gunicorn to run you API as a production server.

Interesting looks like it might actually be a python bug. Somehow just changing from sys.exit(0) -> os._exit(0) apparently fixes it.

https://github.com/benoitc/gunicorn/pull/2820

The cool thing is that you can easily migrate your WSGI- application such as Flask, Django, or Gunicorn to AWS.

Yeah, that's kind of the impression I was getting. I stumbled across a github issue for gunicorn along these lines.

Taking a glimpse at gunicorn's code it looks like they pretty much all do the same: 2. seems to be creating a wsgi app using django's internals, and 3. uses 2.

The angle brackets on their own should be a sign that this is not the case, because that's not regular expression syntax. Flask uses werkzeug.routing instead. In fact, the module docs specifically call out the difference:

Flask doesn’t support ASGI; neither does Werkzeug. The official guidance for running Flask with an ASGI server is to wrap it in middleware. The open GitHub issue for Werkzeug to support ASGI is #1322.

But this may be a starting point: https://github.com/pallets/werkzeug/blob/main/src/werkzeug/middleware/http_proxy.py

> In this case, he initially presumed that the problem would be with Flask, Bottle, and Tornado still honoring a semi-colon as a separator in a uri

Flask (or rather Werkzeug what it's based on) removed implicit semicolon support for URL 13 years ago: https://github.com/pallets/werkzeug/commit/0ea28bbc6f5f05eef...

Werkzeug (library used by Flask) had a repr for its sentinel long before getting type annotations.

Flask getting async support is a huge step for the asyncio web ecosystem in Python. I wonder how Flask's ASGI support will evolve in parallel with Quart[1] which bills itself as the ASGI version of Flask and is maintained by a member of the Pallets team. One of the maintainers of Werkzeug even recommended using Quart[2]

[1] https://pgjones.gitlab.io/quart/

[2] https://github.com/pallets/werkzeug/issues/1322#issuecomment...

I’m pretty sure you need to establish a ‘werkzeug’ logger in a logging configuration and make sure that it has a handler for its effective level. But that’s just what I got from reading the source code. I could very well be wrong

You're not able to change the loglevel with werkzeug. It's hardcoded to info: https://github.com/pallets/werkzeug/blob/72b2e48e7d44927b1b7d6b2f940d0691230de893/src/werkzeug/serving.py#L388

The PRs are this initial one and this update. Also note this issue - almost 5 years to close :o.