Nginx Unit • Hacker News Board

Re: Nginx Unit

#71

Post by FooBarWidget » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 11:53 AM UTC

jeremyjh wrote: post #52

FooBarWidget wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was the last time you heard something about it?

When was the last time you heard something about zlib? At a certain point - libraries are basically done. They are widely distributed, everyone knows what they are, there is no reason to talk about them but they are still maintained and heavily used.

Libraries can be done, but that has got nothing to do with momentum. Momentum depends on mindshare, on the willingness of people to use and to keep using it. Most programmers don't choose technology based purely on merits, they choose it based on "I heard X talk about Y and s/he said good things, so I guess I'll use it". We programmers aren't as rational as we think.

Re: Nginx Unit

#72

Post by etatoby » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 11:55 AM UTC

justonepost wrote: post #46

bluetech wrote: post #37

I'm happy to see this. nginx itself is excellent software, I'll be happy to use similar tech for the application server as well (instead of uwsgi). There are a couple of options I'd like to see added to the Python configuration though before I could try it: - Ability to point it at a virtualenv. - Ability to set environment variables for the application.

lol.. nginx en-masse configuration is a nightmare. i can point to a fortune 50 company that it's destroying for relying on it. I won't name names :)

So they deployed a bad config file to all nodes and restarted the service, which then failed to start.

How is this specific to Nginx? This same mistake is possible with any other software ever written.

Re: Nginx Unit

#73

Post by etatoby » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 11:58 AM UTC

foota wrote: post #2

This would take the place of something like tomcat or uwsgi, right?

The day I can toss Tomcat to the bin and replace it with something written in C that allows zero-downtime restarts will be a fine day indeed.

Re: Nginx Unit

#74

Post by noway421 » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 12:00 PM UTC

Any use for that on small scale (of 1 instance)? If you'd need to run nginx in front of it anyway, does it provide any use in case where you'd normally use php-fpm and some proxy_pass?

Re: Nginx Unit

#75

Post by noway421 » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 12:01 PM UTC

tokenizerrr wrote: post #12

thanksgiving wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a small flask application which basically is a rest get post API server. I'm struggling to make deployment easy. With PHP, i just push to the application server and rsync that folder into var www html for Apache httpd but what would I do for flask python 3?

Ansible? Puppet? A five line bash script?

rsync && ssh target -t 'cd ~/app/; ...' and it's a one-liner.

Re: Nginx Unit

#76

Post by noway421 » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 12:04 PM UTC

marktam264 wrote: post #39

Is this like AWS Lambda you could put in your own cloud?

This type of question is indication that NGINX Inc. salesmen did fail horribly to conceive of what the product actually is in layman engineering terms. Too much buzzword compliance.

Re: Nginx Unit

#77

Post by kawsper » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 12:04 PM UTC

skrebbel wrote: post #24

This looks pretty cool, and makes me sad that Mongrel2 never became popular. In short: Mongrel2 solves the same problem, but does it by letting your application handle requests and websocket connections over ZeroMQ instead of eg FastCGI. I guess it lost momentum when ZeroMQ did. Anyone know why? Sounds like a dream solution in the current microservice hype. http://mongrel2.org/

That is a really cool idea, do you know of other projects like it?

Re: Nginx Unit

#78

Post by speleding » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 12:07 PM UTC

mmahemoff wrote: post #21

Confusing description. After seeing the Github README ( https://github.com/nginx/unit#integration-with-nginx ), it looks to be Nginx's alternative to low-level, language-specific, app servers, e.g. PHP-FPM or Rack, with the benefit that a single Unit process can support multiple languages via its dynamic module architecture, similar to Nginx web server's dynamic modules. It's still intended to run behind Nginx web se…

From the description it sounds a lot like the Passenger Nginx module. https://www.phusionpassenger.com

Re: Nginx Unit

#79

Post by noway421 » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 12:07 PM UTC

hathym wrote: post #19

how does it compare to openresty/luajit ?

AFAIK nginx unit would still require to have an nginx in front, so they are in different weight category with openresty.

It looks like it's more of a replacement to good old NGINX+Apache set up where there would be mod_php, mod_cgi, mod_perl and .htaccess on backend to serve the app.

Re: Nginx Unit

#80

Post by bpicolo » Thu, Sep 07, 2017, 12:16 PM UTC

fermigier wrote: post #68

jchw wrote: post #64

Sounds like uWSGI based on the description. I wonder how it'll play along with certain environments like Kubernetes.

Same. I really want to like (and use) uWSGI, for many reasons, but I find it's lacking severely in the department of documentation (searching "uwsgi" on Amazon gives zero hits!). A properly edited book would be awesome. I would pay for it of course.

Yep. Somewhat tricky when you have 896 runtime options. That said, have been happy running uwsgi in production for a lot of python (and php) services.

Yelp.com runs behind uwsgi, and effectively all of the python services behind it do as well. Some use more uncommon features like gevent support.