StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Platform as a Service
  4. Web Server Interface
  5. Waitress vs uWSGI

Waitress vs uWSGI

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

uWSGI
uWSGI
Stacks424
Followers311
Votes12
GitHub Stars3.5K
Forks699
Waitress
Waitress
Stacks16
Followers58
Votes7
GitHub Stars1.5K
Forks182

Waitress vs uWSGI: What are the differences?

Introduction:

In the world of web servers and application deployment, there are several options available, each with its own set of features and capabilities. Two popular options are Waitress and uWSGI. While both serve the purpose of hosting web applications, there are key differences between them. In this article, we will highlight six significant differences between Waitress and uWSGI.

1. Scalability:

Waitress is a lightweight web server mainly designed for development and small-scale deployments. It is ideal for testing and running applications locally on a developer's machine. On the other hand, uWSGI is a highly scalable application server that can handle a large number of concurrent connections and requests. It is commonly used in production environments where high performance and scalability are crucial.

2. Protocol Support:

Waitress primarily supports HTTP/1.1 protocol, making it easy to integrate with web frameworks built using this protocol. In contrast, uWSGI supports a vast range of protocols, including HTTP, FastCGI, SCGI, uWSGI, and more. This extended protocol support enables uWSGI to integrate with various web frameworks and legacy systems.

3. Load Balancer:

While Waitress does not provide built-in load balancing capabilities, uWSGI includes a load balancing mechanism. This feature enables uWSGI to distribute incoming requests across multiple worker processes or servers, ensuring efficient resource utilization and improved application performance in high traffic scenarios.

4. Configuration Flexibility:

Waitress offers a straightforward configuration setup, making it easy to get started and configure basic settings. However, if advanced or custom configuration is required, Waitress might not provide the necessary flexibility. On the other hand, uWSGI offers a wide range of configuration options, allowing users to fine-tune various aspects of the server behavior to meet specific requirements.

5. Language Support:

Waitress is primarily designed for Python applications and is typically used as a Python WSGI server. It integrates well with popular Python web frameworks such as Django and Flask. In contrast, uWSGI has broader language support and can be used with a variety of programming languages, including Python, Ruby, Perl, and more. This makes uWSGI a versatile choice for multi-language applications.

6. Performance:

When it comes to performance, uWSGI is often regarded as a high-performance server due to its optimized architecture and efficient request handling. It employs various performance-enhancing techniques such as caching, lazy-app loading, and threading. While Waitress is capable of handling moderate loads, it may not be as performant as uWSGI in resource-intensive scenarios.

In summary, the key differences between Waitress and uWSGI include scalability, protocol support, load balancing capability, configuration flexibility, language support, and performance. Waitress is a lightweight server suitable for small-scale deployments, while uWSGI is a highly scalable and versatile application server with extensive protocol support and advanced configuration options, making it suitable for production environments.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

uWSGI
uWSGI
Waitress
Waitress

The uWSGI project aims at developing a full stack for building hosting services.

It is meant to be a production-quality pure-Python WSGI server with very acceptable performance. It has no dependencies except ones which live in the Python standard library. It runs on CPython on Unix and Windows under Python 2.7+ and Python 3.4+. It is also known to run on PyPy 1.6.0 on UNIX.

-
Production-quality WSGI server ; Dont hang a thread up trying to send data to slow clients;Use self.logger to log socket errors instead of self.log_info (normalize); Remove pointless handle_error method from channel; Queue requests instead of tasks in a channel
Statistics
GitHub Stars
3.5K
GitHub Stars
1.5K
GitHub Forks
699
GitHub Forks
182
Stacks
424
Stacks
16
Followers
311
Followers
58
Votes
12
Votes
7
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 6
    Faster
  • 4
    Simple
  • 2
    Powerful
Pros
  • 2
    Runs on Windows
  • 1
    Fast
  • 1
    Cross Platform
  • 1
    Easy setup
  • 1
    Reliable
Integrations
Python
Python
Perl
Perl
Ruby
Ruby
Windows
Windows
Python
Python
Flask
Flask

What are some alternatives to uWSGI, Waitress?

Owin

Owin

It is a standard for an interface between .NET Web applications and Web servers. It is a community-owned open-source project.

Xen Orchestra

Xen Orchestra

It provides a web based UI for the management of XenServer installations without requiring any agent or extra software on your hosts nor VMs.

Werbot

Werbot

It is basically a platform for storing, sharing, and managing server access. But the most valuable part of it concerns the possibility to do an audit and to control the work performed on the server. Our platform can be integrated as an independent service in company infrastructure. It doesn’t change the way developers are used to working on the server, it changes the way they connect on it. All connections to servers are made through a single sign-on and private user access. All the actions performed on servers and in Werbot web interface are logged and recorded (screencasts). The server administrator can not only see what was done on the server by each user and when it was done but also can replay the whole working session in our player. The server audit is made much easier with Werbot.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase