slopfront
preferences

Looking for a flexibel hoster with python support

4 points · submitted Aug 2013 by u/1nvader · archived

Hi,

i currently signed for the Web Developer plan at PythonAnywhere. PythonAnywhere is really greate for people who just want to quickly run their Python websites and Python scripts.

But the Python specialization can also is a big downsite for people (like me) who want more felxibility, and also need to run applications written in other languages (like PHP, Pearl, Java ... whatever).

Therefore i play with the idea to switch from PythonAnywhere to another hosting service. I heard a lot of positive feedback about WebFaction (i really like the idea that users can select the location of the datacenter). The only thing that is a totaly mystery to me, is their memory limit of 256 MB for applications. At the first look 256 MB of memory seems to be very low. But the amout of memory the operation system, Apache, Nginx and databases e take is not included. So how do i know? Is the memory for the interpreter and my programming frameworks included? I really have no idea how may applications i am able to run with those amounts of memory. Is there somebody with some experience on WebFaction who can explain this to me?

Also, recommendations for further hosting services with Python support are welcome!

14 comments · 70% upvoted · other discussions

comments

DanTailor 4 points · Aug 2013

Try https://www.digitalocean.com/

thenaquad 2 points · Aug 2013

i second that. using their service for about 6 month. no issues + they have SSDs. the only problem i've ran into was inability to get more IPs

bcambel 1 points · Aug 2013

even that user interface is enough to give it a try. It's also really working well for me.

vsajip 3 points · Aug 2013

With WebFaction, the memory limit is the memory used by your processes (as determined using ps -u username). This includes Apache processes serving your sites, but AFAIK not databases or nginx (unless you run your own instance - the shared one is used to serve static content).

While you don't get complete control as you would with a VPS, it definitely hits a sweet spot for users like me. WebFaction keeps the server updated with security patches etc. and allows you SSH access and the ability to install your own software from source, while not having to worry too much about maintaining the underlying infrastructure.

I run some low-traffic Django websites, memory usage is usually around the 30MB/60MB mark per Apache process.

1nvader [OP] 1 points · Aug 2013

I run some low-traffic Django websites, memory usage is usually around the 30MB/60MB mark per Apache process.

That sounds good. I only want to run two or three small Flask websites and from time to time some web scraping jobs. So WebFaction should do the job. If i would ever run into memory problems they still offer the upgrade to 512 MB for $7.

1nvader [OP] 1 points · Aug 2013

I gave WebFaction a try. Everything looks good, but this 256 MB limit drives me crazy. I only run one small Flask application (nothing special, just 4 pages) and the 'ps' command always tells me that my current memory usage is about 150 MB. So at the moment it seems impossible to me to run more than one single python application on a WebFaction account. 30/60 MB would be ok, but this is my idle memory usage when i just have restarted Apache.

Any ideas what i am doing wrong?

vsajip 1 points · Aug 2013

I'm surprised, as Flask is supposed to a micro-framework. I assume you're running with mod_wsgi - it's worth checking exactly how your Apache and mod_wsgi is configured. What I'd do:

  1. Try configuring a minimal Django webapp as your only webapp from the control panel (with no actual code of mine) and see how the memory footprint looks.
  2. Ask WebFaction support, they're usually very helpful. They have a fairly good Stack Overflow-like knowledge base which may help.
  3. If it's not configuration-related, use something like Dowser to find where the memory is being used.
tdammers 1 points · Aug 2013

If you want flexibility, then some sort of cloud or VPS hosting is probably the best option - you'll get a complete *nix system with root access, so you can install whatever packages you want and configure them as needed.

As far as cloud hosting goes, Amazon is the obvious "traditional" (in lack of a better word) choice; digitalocean seems to be quite popular too these days. For cheap VPS hosting, check out Low end box. You should be able to find entry-level VPS hosting for under $2/month, and many providers allow you to scale up later when the need arises.

1nvader [OP] 1 points · Aug 2013

You are right, a VPS gives you best flexibility. But i am more a developer and not the sysadmin guy. I don't want to care about system and security updates. So a managed hosting solution seems to be the better choice to me.

tdammers 1 points · Aug 2013

Managed hosting tends to be a security nightmare, especially the cheaper options. The fact alone that you share a server with other users is kind of problematic in and of itself, because it means that a simple "yes/no" access control system, or even a two-tier ("unauthorized" / "regular user" / "super user") system won't suffice.

If you use, say, Debian, as your primary desktop OS, and know how to configure Apache (or nginx) to host a Python web app, then you have most of what you need already. Updates are a matter of installing apticron; if you have outgoing mail configured somewhat well, it'll check for updates once a day and send you an e-mail if there are any.

1nvader [OP] 1 points · Aug 2013

Yes, running a server is not that complicated - even if you are not a sysadmin. But running a secure server is far more complicated than simply keeping your system up to date with the latest patches! I owned a root server a few years ago. But i really don't want to waste my time with any infrastructure stuff again... just want to code some stuff and deploy it somewhere :)

watr 1 points · Aug 2013

Lowendbox website lists all VPSs and coupon codes to save tons of $$$. Found a 128mb ram 1CPU vps on there for $1.38/mo.

mr_dbr 1 points · Aug 2013

https://www.heroku.com/

It's a nice service to use, supports most languages

I've hosted a bunch of sites on their free tier. My only concern is their prices escalate quite quickly (a second "dynamo" jumps the cost from zero to $34/month, which is more than a decent VPS)

brian047 1 points · Aug 2013

I was previously using WebFaction, but since some months now, I have switched to https://www.tilaa.com/ It is cheaper and I am happy with the service.