Hi, nginx’ file-based uwsgi_cache is 76% faster (in terms of requests per second) than Django’s file-based caching for my project. Is there any advantage in using the Django caching framework in a reverse proxy setup with nginx where most responses are static (i.e. can be properly cached by nginx)? And is there any reason to combine nginx and Django caching (now that Henry Fonda cannot sanction a belt and suspenders approach anymore)?
For full page cacheing in the common case, I’m not aware of any advantage or benefit to using both. (I can imagine some edge-case situations where it may be beneficial, but those would all be conjectural in nature.)
I am curious - which caching are you talking about? Are you referring to the nginx proxy_cache or the uwsgi cache, or something else? (Referring primarily to the 76% number you’re quoting.)
I compared the (local) performance of nginx’ uwsgi_cache from the ngx_http_uwsgi_module module (10,815 requests per second) and django.core.cache.backends.filebased.FileBasedCache (6,135 requests per second). There are obviously many other relevant factors in production, I just wanted to do a direct comparison in a simplified environment.
Thanks for confirming my presumption!