uvicorn VS mkcert

This tells Heroku to run uvicorn, which is a web server implementation in Python.

FastAPI uses Uvicorn, an ASGI (Asynchronous Server Gateway Interface) web server implementation for Python.

Now, let’s run our FastAPI application using Uvicorn: uvicorn main:app --reload

Uvicorn + Starlette 8k requests/s

I switched to Hypercorn because Uvicorn currently supports HTTP/1.1 and WebSockets as mentioned at https://www.uvicorn.org

This will set up Chroma and run it as a server with uvicorn, making port 8000 accessible outside the net docker network. The command also mounts a persistent docker volume for Chroma's database, found at chroma/chroma from your project's root.

There's an open discussion under the Uvicorn repository and we prepared a repository for Reproduction GitHub Repo

FastAPI is a popular Python Web framework that developers use to create RESTful APIs. It is based on Pydantic and Python-type hints that assist in the serialization, deserialization, and validation of data. In this tutorial, we will use FastAPI to create a simple "Hello World" application. We test and run the application locally. FastAPI requires a ASGI server to run the application production such as Uvicorn.

- [3] https://github.com/encode/uvicorn/issues/527

Uvicorn and Daphne are both ASGI server implementations that can be used with Django to serve your application using the ASGI protocol. Uvicorn is built on top of the uvloop library, which is a fast implementation of the event loop based on libuv, while Daphne is maintained as part of the Django Channels project and was designed to handle the unique requirements of Django applications that utilize asynchronous features, such as real-time updates, bidirectional communication, and long-lived connections.

The author mentions difficulties with HTTPS and trying stuff locally.

I've had some success with mkcert [1] to easily create certificates trusted by browsers, I can suggest to look into this. You are your own root CA, I think it can work without an internet connection.

[1] https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert/

Solution: mkcert – Your Zero-Configuration HTTPS Enabler Meet mkcert, a user-friendly, zero-configuration tool designed for creating locally-trusted development certificates. Find it on its GitHub page and follow the instructions tailored for your operating system. For Mac users employing Homebrew, simply execute the following commands in your terminal:

Well, Certifi does not ship with your company's certificates! So requesting internal services may come with additional painful extra steps! Also for a local development environment that uses mkcert for example!

My project, getlocalcert.net[1] may be the one you're thinking of.

Since I'm also building in this space, I'll give my perspective. Local certificate generation is complicated. If you spend the time, you can figure it out, but it's begging for a simpler solution. You can use tools like mkcert[2] for anything that's local to your machine. However, if you're already using ACME in production, maybe you'd prefer to use ACME locally? I think that's what Anchor offers, a unified approach.

There's a couple references in the Anchor blog about solving the distribution problem by building better tooling[3]. I'm eager to learn more, that's a tough nut to crack. My theory for getlocalcert is that the distribution problem is too difficult (for me) to solve, so I layer the tool on top of Let's Encrypt certificates instead. The end result for both tools is a trusted TLS certificate issued via ACME automation.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36674224

2. https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert

3. https://blog.anchor.dev/the-acme-gap-introducing-anchor-part...

Looks like step-ca/step-cli [1] and mkcert [2] have been mentioned. Another related tool is XCA [3] - a gui tool to manage CAs and server/client TLS certificates. It takes off some of the tedium in using openssl cli directly. It also stores the certs and keys in an encrypted database. It doesn't solve the problem of getting the root CA certificate into the system store or of hosting the revocation list. I use XCA to create and store the root CA. Intermediate CAs signed with it are passed to other issuers like vault and step-issuer.

[1] https://smallstep.com/docs/step-ca/

[2] https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert

[3] https://hohnstaedt.de/xca/

We use mkcert for this, it works wonderfully.

https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert

mkcert: This is used to obtain a trusted TLS certificate with a custom domain name for your development machine. You can install mkcert on your development machine following the official instructions.

I've been pretty frustrated with how private CAs are supported. Your private root CA can be maliciously used to MITM every domain on the Internet, even though you intend to use it for only a couple domain names. Most people forget to set Name Constraints when they create these and many helper tools lack support [1][2]. Worse, browser support for Name Constraints has been slow [3] and support isn't well tracked [4]. Public CAs give you certificate transparency and you can subscribe to events to detect mis-issuance. Some hosted private CAs like AWS's offer logs [5], but DIY setups don't.

Even still, there are a lot of folks happily using private CAs, they aren't the target audience for this initial release.

[1] https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert/issues/302

[2] https://github.com/cert-manager/cert-manager/issues/3655

[3] https://alexsci.com/blog/name-non-constraint/

[4] https://github.com/Netflix/bettertls/issues/19

[5] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/privateca/latest/userguide/secur...