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 Servers
  5. Jetty vs Uvicorn

Jetty vs Uvicorn

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Jetty
Jetty
Stacks510
Followers311
Votes47
Uvicorn
Uvicorn
Stacks168
Followers119
Votes0

Jetty vs Uvicorn: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Key differences between Jetty and Uvicorn:

  1. Server Implementation: Jetty is a Java-based web server and servlet container, while Uvicorn is an ASGI web server that is specifically designed for running Python web applications. This difference in implementation language and underlying technology affects how the servers handle requests and interact with their respective programming languages.

  2. Concurrency Model: Jetty follows a blocking IO model, whereas Uvicorn utilizes an asynchronous IO model. This means that Uvicorn can handle a larger number of concurrent connections efficiently compared to Jetty, making it a suitable choice for high-performance applications that require handling numerous simultaneous requests.

  3. Security Features: Jetty is known for its robust security features and built-in support for SSL/TLS encryption, which is vital for securing web applications. On the other hand, Uvicorn focuses more on providing a lightweight and fast web server without extensive security features built-in, often requiring additional configurations or tools for securing applications.

  4. Community and Ecosystem: Jetty has a long-standing community and ecosystem due to its Java-based nature, with a wide range of plugins, extensions, and integrations available for developers. Uvicorn, being a newer entrant in the web server space, may have a smaller ecosystem and community support in comparison, potentially impacting the availability of resources and community-driven solutions.

  5. Ease of Deployment: Jetty's deployment can be more involved due to its Java-based nature, requiring a Java runtime environment to be installed. Conversely, Uvicorn, being a Python-based server, can be easily deployed using popular Python package managers such as pip, making it more straightforward and accessible for Python developers.

  6. Scalability: Uvicorn is designed with scalability in mind, offering features like automatic process management and graceful reloading of worker processes, allowing for efficient scaling of web applications across multiple CPU cores or servers. Jetty, while scalable, may require more manual configuration for achieving similar levels of scalability and performance in distributed or high-demand environments.

In Summary, the key differences between Jetty and Uvicorn lie in their server implementation, concurrency model, security features, community support, deployment ease, and scalability capabilities.

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

Jetty
Jetty
Uvicorn
Uvicorn

Jetty is used in a wide variety of projects and products, both in development and production. Jetty can be easily embedded in devices, tools, frameworks, application servers, and clusters. See the Jetty Powered page for more uses of Jetty.

It is a lightning-fast ASGI server, built on uvloop and httptools. Until recently Python has lacked a minimal low-level server/application interface for asyncio frameworks. The ASGI specification fills this gap, and means we're now able to start building a common set of tooling usable across all asyncio frameworks.

Full-featured and standards-based; Open source and commercially usable; Flexible and extensible; Small footprint; Embeddable; Asynchronous; Enterprise scalable; Dual licensed under Apache and Eclipse
ASGI server implementation; Supports HTTP/1.1 and WebSockets; Support for HTTP/2 is planned
Statistics
Stacks
510
Stacks
168
Followers
311
Followers
119
Votes
47
Votes
0
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 15
    Lightweight
  • 10
    Embeddable
  • 10
    Very fast
  • 6
    Scalable
  • 6
    Very thin
Cons
  • 0
    Student
No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available
Python
Python

What are some alternatives to Jetty, Uvicorn?

NGINX

NGINX

nginx [engine x] is an HTTP and reverse proxy server, as well as a mail proxy server, written by Igor Sysoev. According to Netcraft nginx served or proxied 30.46% of the top million busiest sites in Jan 2018.

Apache HTTP Server

Apache HTTP Server

The Apache HTTP Server is a powerful and flexible HTTP/1.1 compliant web server. Originally designed as a replacement for the NCSA HTTP Server, it has grown to be the most popular web server on the Internet.

Unicorn

Unicorn

Unicorn is an HTTP server for Rack applications designed to only serve fast clients on low-latency, high-bandwidth connections and take advantage of features in Unix/Unix-like kernels. Slow clients should only be served by placing a reverse proxy capable of fully buffering both the the request and response in between Unicorn and slow clients.

Microsoft IIS

Microsoft IIS

Internet Information Services (IIS) for Windows Server is a flexible, secure and manageable Web server for hosting anything on the Web. From media streaming to web applications, IIS's scalable and open architecture is ready to handle the most demanding tasks.

Apache Tomcat

Apache Tomcat

Apache Tomcat powers numerous large-scale, mission-critical web applications across a diverse range of industries and organizations.

Passenger

Passenger

Phusion Passenger is a web server and application server, designed to be fast, robust and lightweight. It takes a lot of complexity out of deploying web apps, adds powerful enterprise-grade features that are useful in production, and makes administration much easier and less complex.

Gunicorn

Gunicorn

Gunicorn is a pre-fork worker model ported from Ruby's Unicorn project. The Gunicorn server is broadly compatible with various web frameworks, simply implemented, light on server resources, and fairly speedy.

lighttpd

lighttpd

lighttpd has a very low memory footprint compared to other webservers and takes care of cpu-load. Its advanced feature-set (FastCGI, CGI, Auth, Output-Compression, URL-Rewriting and many more) make lighttpd the perfect webserver-software for every server that suffers load problems.

Swoole

Swoole

It is an open source high-performance network framework using an event-driven, asynchronous, non-blocking I/O model which makes it scalable and efficient.

Puma

Puma

Unlike other Ruby Webservers, Puma was built for speed and parallelism. Puma is a small library that provides a very fast and concurrent HTTP 1.1 server for Ruby web applications.

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