Puneet Kishor wrote, On 11/09/11 19:14:
> On Nov 9, 2011, at 5:59 PM, Assaf Gordon wrote:
>> Puneet Kishor wrote, On 11/09/11 18:47:
>>> Very nice. But, I don't get why is it that I am able to run several Starman 
>>> powered Dancer apps behind Apache front-end without every having declared 
>>> the behind_proxy setting in the config file.
>>>
>> Perhaps you have some special Apache configuration ? and proxying not 
>> through TCP ? or perhaps you're only using relative links ?
> 
> OK. That makes sense. I am not using request->uri_* at all. I actually have 
> fully qualified links always, and I set them up in my config files like so
> 
> appuri: "...."
> liburi: "...."
> 
> and then, in my templates, [% appuri %]/foo etc.
> 
> No wonder I never experienced this as an issue. On the other hand, I've had 
> countless other issues with deployment, and the only one that has worked for 
> me is Starman behind Apache proxy. As a result, I now I have 12 Dancer apps 
> on my iMac with 10 Starman workers on each, so my process list is polluted 
> with 120 of Perl processes.

Would you mind sharing some of the issues ? might help with the documentation, 
recommending what to avoid.

> At some point I have to revisit running all this via mod_perl or mod_psgi or 
> whatever.

IMHO, "mod_perl" + Plack::Handler::Apache2 should be avoided until the issue of 
multiple Dancers is resolved.

I haven't tried "mod_psgi" yet.

> I never could get fast_cgi to work with Apache.
> 
The current documentation for Apache+FastCGI is incorrect (or at least 
incomplete).

The examples included in my new POD are working - guaranteed! (and if you find 
errors, please let me know).

-gordon

_______________________________________________
Dancer-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users

Reply via email to