Re: FastCGI vs local server with reverse proxy

[Christof Meerwald <cmeerw%cmeerw.org@localhost>]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2025 at 09:28:56AM +0530, Mayuresh wrote:
> I am considering developing a web application. It's a user interface to a
> system of records. No fancy widgets. In fact no javascript. It is expected
> to work with elinks as a client.
> 
> While I'd usually choose Python for such application, I am deliberately
> choosing C++ this time, to get a first hand experience of the current C++
> ecosystem to build web applications.
> 
> Nearly half of its usage will be on localhost and rest half over the web.
> 
> For localhost usage I can reduce the overheads of TLS and in fact a full
> web server, too. For example, I can use a local web server like
> cpp-httplib.
> 
> For web usage I am considering lighttpd. Now I have two options:
> 
> 1. Use FastCGI with lighttpd (no cpp-httplib).
> 
> 2. Use reverse proxy with cpp-httplib server, and use the same cpp-httplib
> server for localhost interactions without lighttpd in picture.

I would certainly use FastCGI here, simply because of the complexities
of handling HTTP correctly, e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_request_smuggling


> Intuitively I feel cpp-httplib would perform better on localhost (No TLS,
> No IPC) than lighttpd + FastCGI.
> 
> I did some quick trials and find the results that are a bit
> counter-intuitive to me.
> 
> lighttpd + FastCGI + TLS with elinks as client gives a much snappier feel
> than cpp-httplib standalone server + no TLS with elinks.
> 
> Is this something to be expected? Are there any other choices for above
> mix of requirements?

Not really expected if everything is implemented correctly. Maybe
something to do with concurrent connections not being handled
in the best way with cpp-httplib?


Christof

-- 
https://cmeerw.org                             sip:cmeerw at cmeerw.org
mailto:cmeerw at cmeerw.org                   xmpp:cmeerw at cmeerw.org