I didn’t have to do anything special for Puma to parse X-Forwarded-For from Varnish and HAproxy, so this is all a bit mysterious
i am wondering now if the rollbar gem could be causing this
But even that should only scrub the headers that get sent to Rollbar, and not actually remove them from the rack request.
My rails app is too slow
Using puma
@danilogarcia024 You’ll want to implement that in Rack, either nesting apps as middleware or using something like Rack::URLMap to build a routing tree. If that’s not an option you’ll likely end up needing to maintain multiple Puma processes with some kind of reverse proxy / request router in front of them
Hello. I have a Rails initializer that contains some code that I only want to run when we are running in server mode (not console or test). Than can be done if you boot with
rails server as Rails::Server is only defined when that command is run. However we use the puma binary in production, Rails::Server is not defined and Puma::Server is always defined. Is there a way I can detect that I am running inside a puma server?
In my current environment, puma becomes silent (returns no response) when I modify code while puma is up.
Of course, when I restart puma manually, it works correctly.
aaand where's the changelog by the way? trying to find what's new in 3.7
oh it's called History.md
Hey folks, is it normal (but I guess not) that even though puma says:
Puma starting in cluster mode...
* Version 3.9.1 (ruby 2.3.4-p301), codename: Private Caller
* Min threads: 1, max threads: 3
* Environment: development
* Process workers: 2
* Phased restart available
* Listening on tcp://0.0.0.0:9295I have the 2 clusters with 8 threads each...
I don't think Puma spins up any additional threads, but I could be wrong and that may be accounting for the difference.
I run my Puma servers on jRuby, so I see many more threads than that.
Hi there. This is going to sound like a completely noob question. We are wishing to use logstash http input. This input starts a puma server for you. Locally (macbook) this puma webserver is processing 8k requests a second. However, as soon as we put this on an AWS linux instance (bigger boxes), the rps is 90 requests a second (c4.8xl even only 90rps). Is there some configuration somewhere, that needs to be changed on a linux server for it to be performant on a linux instance (have noticed the same issue on vagrant centos, and ubuntu vms).
Eh, hi! I got interested in adding a low_level_error_handler to my app, as I read about it in Sentry's docs. My app is started using the Rack::Server.new way of saying it. Here's the invocation used.
server = Rack::Server.new(
config: File.join('..', 'server/config.ru'),
server: 'puma',
Port: 22000,
Silent: true
)Is there a way to add a low_level_error_handler at this level?
Source: https://docs.sentry.io/clients/ruby/integrations/puma/
Hey All, I know it's a long weekend in the US, but hoping I can get a reply here. I have puma in my gemfile, and I'm using Mina (similar to capistrano) to handle deployment. We're keeping 5 releases on the server. Every 6th release, puma fails to restart and says that it can't find the puma executable. When this happens, it's looking for the executable in the most-recently-deleted release. It's like when Puma daemonizes, it links itself to the executable in the
releases path, rather than the current path. I've tried this both using an init.d script. I've also set the directory in my config file, to no avail. Any help here would be greatly appreciated.
It's worth noting that this behaviour is new since we upgraded from 2.10.2 to 3.10.0.
Hello! Currently I use HAProxy to load balance 10 servers. Each server has both nginx (as a reverse proxy) and Puma (as application server). I wonder if nginx is required, or if it would be more performant to use Puma directly (behind HAProxy). The reasons why I have nginx are: 1. serve static assets (like css, js, etc.) faster 2. protect Puma from slow clients
@collimarco_twitter I think you'd want to keep nginx for reason 1. Otherwise, your framework will need to handle those. I'm fairly confident that Rails is much slower at this, and plus with Nginx it's a config file change to start gzipping assets or doing other stuff with them if needed. I'm not convinced it offers any benefits for reason 2, but the best way to know for sure is to run your own test with slow clients.
@collimarco_twitter If you're okay with HAProxy helping out with slow clients, there appears to be some configuration you can do there: https://www.haproxy.com/blog/what-is-a-slow-post-attack-and-how-turn-haproxy-into-your-first-line-of-defense/