On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:57:02 -0800 "Jeremy Kemper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/27/07, Kirk Haines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 2/27/07, Pete DeLaurentis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with Mongrel, > > > mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users have to > > > wait for it. > > > > > > I'm using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now. > > > > No, it isn't a must for Mongrel. It may be a must for Rails, but it > > isn't a must for Mongrel. There is a difference. It's often blurred > > in both questions and responses, but Mongrel is far more than just a > > Rails platform. > > > This is true. However, his assertion is valid: it's a must for any web app > that uses blocking API calls, like executing queries using the native mysql > and postgres clients. That's just life with Ruby threads. ... and eventually people will start asking why there's nearly 10 other Ruby web frameworks that run fine in Mongrel without a big lock and do nearly the same things as Rails or even use the same technologies as Rails. -- Zed A. Shaw, MUDCRAP-CE Master Black Belt Sifu http://www.zedshaw.com/ http://www.awprofessional.com/title/0321483502 -- The Mongrel Book http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/ http://www.lingr.com/room/3yXhqKbfPy8 -- Come get help. _______________________________________________ Mongrel-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
