[RAILS] way too slow...

[Thomas Fini Hansen]

They're not too fond of each other. It won't reload the requires of
your requires, so it basically doesn't work for changing the model.
You'll have to restart Apache when doing that.

Hmm? What version did you try? I'm looking at the one from mod_ruby
1.2.0 and it seems to spend a lot of effort on tracking what files
depend on which, in order to being able to reload the right stuff..

But my source-reading-fu isn't that strong, so whether it actually
works...

 

[Carl Youngblood]

I too am using webrick and it is much faster than 1 request per second
even in autoload mode.

 

[James Britt]

I too am using webrick and it is much faster than 1 request per second
even in autoload mode.

How doe one specify auto-reload in WEBrick?


Thanks,



James

 

[Florian Weber]

It sounds like you would rather use something that has impressive

Yes, I realize what you are saying, and rails devel *is* fun. Except
for the agonizing long time it takes for a page to reload to show me
what I've changed. That seems to mitigate against the supposed
increase in devel time. It's actually taking me longer to devel in
rails right now. (I'm still learning ruby, too)

like david already said, that requests can take up to one second using
cgi is totally normal. ruby has to parse tons of classes for every
execution
with that. i have to admit that i was also surprised by that at first.
especially
when you compare it to php. but then again most of the php libs are c..

anyways. i really never even thought that rails is slowing me down in
my development. i mean, i use unit tests for most of the stuff and just
every now and then i have to test the ui and controller via http
requests.
works great!

 

[David Heinemeier Hansson]

How doe one specify auto-reload in WEBrick?

It's not a WEBrick feature, but a feature for the WEBrick adapter in
Rails. If you start it with "ruby dispatch.servlet -a", you'll be
running in auto-reload mode.
--
David Heinemeier Hansson,
http://www.rubyonrails.org/ -- Web-application framework for Ruby
http://www.instiki.org/ -- A No-Step-Three Wiki in Ruby
http://www.basecamphq.com/ -- Web-based Project Management
http://www.loudthinking.com/ -- Broadcasting Brain
http://www.nextangle.com/ -- Development & Consulting Services

 

[David Morton]

like david already said, that requests can take up to one second using
cgi is totally normal. ruby has to parse tons of classes for every
execution
with that. i have to admit that i was also surprised by that at first.
especially
when you compare it to php. but then again most of the php libs are c..

Hmm, that makes me wonder if part of the rails framework could be set up
as some C extensions...

 

[Pat Eyler]

Hmm, that makes me wonder if part of the rails framework could be set up
as some C extensions...

If profiling indicates it, you might look into rubyinline ... really a
nice way to get those c extensions in quickly and easily.

-pate

 

[Florian Weber]

like david already said, that requests can take up to one second using

Hmm, that makes me wonder if part of the rails framework could be set
up as some C extensions...

no. that would be such a waste of time. i also meant the ruby standard
library and
not rails.

like i said though, use unit/function tests.. then you shouldnt have to
reload pages with every small change anyways..

 

[Carl Youngblood]

"Premature optimization is the root of all evil."
-- Sir Charles Anthony Richard Hoare

 

[Lothar Scholz]

Hello Wes,

WM> It sounds like you would rather use something that has impressive
WM> looking benchmark numbers than something that will reduce your
WM> develpment time. I would suggest php (www.php.net). There are plenty
WM> of PHP frameworks available, although none will be as fun to use as
WM> rails.

Sorry but this is not a good suggestion.

I think we must compare our ruby solutions with existing web frameworks in
perl or python. And they have some really good solutions like Mason or
Webware out there. And i really doubt that you can get a real
development speed advantage with RAILS.

 

[Kirk Haines]

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:44:41 +0900, Lothar Scholz wrote

I think we must compare our ruby solutions with existing web
frameworks in perl or python. And they have some really good
solutions like Mason or Webware out there. And i really doubt that
you can get a real development speed advantage with RAILS.

Oh, I bet there is. My "killer app" is Iowa because of the development ease
and speed advantage it gives me.

Rails and Iowa, while having different architectures, have a lot of overlap
in the problems that they solve, so I have no doubt that programming with
Rails imparts a boost to development speed.


Kirk Haines

 

[Lothar Scholz]

Hello Kirk,

KH> Rails and Iowa, while having different architectures, have a lot of overlap
KH> in the problems that they solve, so I have no doubt that programming with
KH> Rails imparts a boost to development speed.

Compared to what ?

Every other solution on this planet ? I only looked at the Rails
webpage and i must say that the differences between for example
Webware and rails are more a matter of style and personal preference.

 

[Caio Chassot]

Every other solution on this planet ? I only looked at the Rails

webpage and i must say that the differences between for example
Webware and rails are more a matter of style and personal preference.

It might be on the application server side of things (stuff like request
handling, sessions), but you can't quite compare ActiveRecord to MiddleKit.

 

[Kirk Haines]

Hello Kirk,

KH> Rails and Iowa, while having different architectures, have a lot
of overlap KH> in the problems that they solve, so I have no doubt
that programming with KH> Rails imparts a boost to development speed.

Compared to what ?

Compared to my years of working in the Perl world doing web work.


Kirk Haines

 

[Florian Weber]

Hello Kirk,

KH> Rails and Iowa, while having different architectures, have a lot
of overlap
KH> in the problems that they solve, so I have no doubt that
programming with
KH> Rails imparts a boost to development speed.

Compared to what ?

Every other solution on this planet ? I only looked at the Rails
webpage and i must say that the differences between for example

quite honestly i think only looking at the webpage and the examples
doesnt
show enough to judge if it speeds up development or not. give it a try
=)

quite honestly i still dont understand how somebody could say rails is
'unusable'.
how many apps are out there which cant do caching and at the same time
have thousands of requests at the same time? if you are building
amazon2 rails
might just not be the right thing for you. but then again, then you
might have the
money to make it not matter anymore if there are 1 or 50 servers =)

that doesnt mean though that rails' performance wont improve. it will..