![]() ![]() If you need to scale your backend server, you can easily use something like pound/haproxy between the frontend (static-serving) HTTP and your backends (Zope is often deployed like that) Things are a bit easier to debug, since you can easily hit directly the backend server nginx forwarding HTTP requests to Starman) has the following advantages: So why you would choose one over the other?Ī reverse proxy setup (e.g. Similarly, nginx configuration for either option is very similar. ![]() fork/process manager style servers aswell as non-blocking event-based (e.g. ![]() UNIX domain sockets aswell as TCP sockets.It seems that Starman is widely considered to be the fastest and best Perl PSGI application/web server out there, and I am struggling to see any advantages to using FastCGI at all. However, I am specifically interested in the pros/cons of using FastCGI vs a reverse-proxy approach. ![]() allow nginx to serve static content, easy restart of application server, load balancing, etc.) Why use nginx with Catalyst/Plack/Starman?)Īnd the answers seem to apply in both cases (e.g. There have been lots of question as to why one would do this in general (e.g. A very popular choice for running Perl web applications these days seems to be behind a nginx webserver proxying requests to either a FastCGI daemon or a PSGI enabled webserver (e.g. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |