

Mod_rails vs. mongrel vs. thin: a benchmark - apathy
http://izumi.plan99.net/blog/index.php/2008/03/31/benchmark-passenger-mod_rails-vs-mongrel-vs-thin/

======
zapnap
I have to admit I'm intrigued, but at the same time I'm really wishing it was
a proper mod_rack instead of a mod_rails. Rack, for those who don't know, is
the Ruby equivalent to Python's WSGI. A number of other Ruby web frameworks
are built on Rack, including Merb, Ramaze, Sinatra and Waves.

That said, I'm still pretty excited and the numbers are promising. Wonder how
well it handles long-running requests (which is Thin's problem, currently)

------
fendale
I am very interested to see the memory usage. With mod_perl, you pre-loaded a
lot of your modules in the httpd.conf file, and Apache loads them once and
shares them across all processes saving memory. With Rails that could give
large memory savings, and memory is the major pain point of getting more than
one or two Rails apps up and running on the same server as I understand it.

------
veritas
Good stuff. I would've liked to see data for: Nginx + Mongrels, Ngninx/Apache
+ Evented Mongrels, Swiftiply + Evented Mongrels.

[http://brainspl.at/articles/2007/05/12/event-driven-
mongrel-...](http://brainspl.at/articles/2007/05/12/event-driven-mongrel-and-
swiftiply-proxy)

------
zapnap
also, fwiw, mod_rubinius is also underway (old-ish news, but highly relevant):
[http://brainspl.at/articles/2008/02/12/what-do-you-want-
to-s...](http://brainspl.at/articles/2008/02/12/what-do-you-want-to-see-in-
mod_rubinius)

------
inklesspen
What? A mod_rails? Really? Where will the madness end?

