in reply to Re^2: UTF-8 and PSGI/Starman vs. CGI
in thread UTF-8 and PSGI/Starman vs. CGI

The controls and options are deeper and it is much more robust. Starman starts dropping requests and such under load. I suspect my problems were largely an edge case caused by legacy code and EOL'd Linux but I had nothing but straight up segfaults and mysterious socket failures pointing to ancient unconfirmed tickets trying to get Starman working at work. Here is one of many benchmarks out there. I really wanted to like Starman better. I'm gung-ho for Perl even when it's not the best option but in this case, for me at least, there was nothing at all to recommend the Perl side.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: UTF-8 and PSGI/Starman vs. CGI
by karlgoethebier (Abbot) on Mar 22, 2018 at 11:39 UTC
    "...Starman starts dropping requests and such under load..."

    May be, i don't know but i can imagine this. I didn't eat the wisdom with spoons but for this reason(s) it might be probably a good idea to set up nginx as a reverse proxy. It should handle the requests much better than Starman. It's a common setup.

    Just some thoughts.

    Best regards, Karl

    «The Crux of the Biscuit is the Apostrophe»

    perl -MCrypt::CBC -E 'say Crypt::CBC->new(-key=>'kgb',-cipher=>"Blowfish")->decrypt_hex($ENV{KARL});'Help

[reply]
[d/l]
      Yep, my actual setup has nginx as a reverse proxy for normal users. I just went to bypassing nginx and talking to starman directly so that I could see whether the encoding problem was caused by nginx or not.
[reply]
Re^4: UTF-8 and PSGI/Starman vs. CGI
by stevieb (Canon) on Mar 21, 2018 at 17:33 UTC
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom