Thank you very much for your answer! I have a better understanding now about the new servers. :)
Currently ruby enterprise edition is in 1.8.7 and I prefer to use 1.9.2. My problem with the passenger is with the slow initial server response time. I have tried many things (including all the recommendations from here http://stackoverflow.com/questions/853532/slow-initial-server-startup-when-using-phusion-passenger-and-rails), but I didn't see any significant difference. That is basically the main issue with the passenger which I don't know how to fix it and made me thinking of other solutions. If I use nginx instead of apache, will this help with the problem? On 31 Μάϊος, 11:22, Peter De Berdt <peter.de.be...@pandora.be> wrote: > On 30 May 2011, at 20:12, Yiannis wrote: > > > I bought a new server and I was wondering what application server is > > the best choice for a typical web application with rails. > > > I've thought for a long time that the best choice was apache/nginx and > > phusion passenger but nowadays I am hearing a lot about thin and > > unicorn. I have used passenger a lot and to be honest, even though > > passenger is very easy to setup, wasn't so great. What is your > > suggestions? > > What was "not so great" about Passenger? For us it's serving high > volumes with great ease and performance. > > For your typical Rails application, Passenger will be the best choice > (with ruby enterprise edition). It's easy to setup, it spawns new > instances when it needs to, kills them when they have been idle for a > while. > > Both Thin and Unicorn work behind a load balancer (whether that's > Apache's or HAProxy or ... doesn't really matter all too much). It's up > to you to decide beforehand how many instances you expect to be needed > to run and they will all be running all the time. > > Now, there are valid scenarios where you could consider using Thin or > Unicorn over Passenger. > Thin, being an evented server, is simply so much better than Passenger > when you're using gems like EventMachine. Not that it can't be done > with Passenger, but you'll need to be very careful with spinning down > the reactor on despawn, firing it back up again on every new instance > spawn and spawning a new instance usually takes a bit longer too. > Unicorn is great for fast clients, but falls dead in the water with > slow clients (Rainbow claims to solve this more or less). So when > using Unicorn, you need to be 100% sure you will be dealing with low > latency clients (i.e. no mobile, no keepalive sockets etc). It really > should be: request, response, spit it out. > > The gist of this whole reply is that you should determine for your > application which application will suit it best and what your personal > preference is (yeah, that also comes into play quite often :-)). We > use Passenger for just about everything, but also have one or two Thin > servers running for legacy apps that run under a different Ruby version. > > Best regards > > Peter De Berdt -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
