Rails - Jan 2006 - Rails or Java J2EE (Spring, Struts Shale) - scalabilty

Hi,

normally I am doing all my webprojects with PHP. But now I am planning
to use a framework, either Ruby On Rails, or Java in particular J2EE
with Java Spring, or Struts Shale.

Well, I already tried RoR a few month ago, so I am simply comparing it
to the Java alternatives now. My problem is, that maybe using Java for
my projects is like using a dredger to grub a small hole :) But on the
other hand I don''t know, how heavily my next project will be used.
Maybe
I have 50 requests per second, or only 50 requests per hour. I only have
one server for this project (1,5 GHz, 512 MB RAM) and I am not sure, if
ruby on rails can manage 50 requests per second. Any experiences?

I don''t know, how Tomcat behaves compared to ruby on rails. Does
anybody
know, which one scales better? Which one needs more Cpu Power, or memory
usage? PHP seems to use less memory, or cpu power compared to RoR. Or
would it be possible to run similar webapps like amazon, or ebay with
RoR? (Having enough server capacity assumed)

With Java it is possible to share the application on several servers (if
this case should occur). Is this possible with RoR too?

Greetings

Mike

On 1/19/06, Michael Gebhart <mail@miketech.net>
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> normally I am doing all my webprojects with PHP. But now I am planning
> to use a framework, either Ruby On Rails, or Java in particular J2EE
> with Java Spring, or Struts Shale.
>
> Well, I already tried RoR a few month ago, so I am simply comparing it
> to the Java alternatives now. My problem is, that maybe using Java for
> my projects is like using a dredger to grub a small hole :) But on the
> other hand I don''t know, how heavily my next project will be used.
Maybe
> I have 50 requests per second, or only 50 requests per hour. I only have
> one server for this project (1,5 GHz, 512 MB RAM) and I am not sure, if
> ruby on rails can manage 50 requests per second. Any experiences?

This all depends on what sort of work your app is doing.  The # of requests
you can handle per second will vary so widely that without a better idea of
what you''re doing, it''s almost impossible to say.

I don''t know, how Tomcat behaves compared to ruby on rails. Does
anybody
> know, which one scales better? Which one needs more Cpu Power, or memory
> usage? PHP seems to use less memory, or cpu power compared to RoR. Or
> would it be possible to run similar webapps like amazon, or ebay with
> RoR? (Having enough server capacity assumed)

With enough server capacity, RoR can scale quite well.  Raw performance
numbers are usually a bit lower than Java due to the fact that RoR is
interpreted, while Java is byte-compiled.  Ruby is not the language to use
if you need to eke out every last bit of performance from a given piece of
hardware.  With the price of hardware nowadays, this is almost never an
issue.

With Java it is possible to share the application on several servers
(if
> this case should occur). Is this possible with RoR too?

Using FastCGI (maybe SCGI but I haven''t looked into it),  you can
distribute
RoR apps w/ load balancing across many servers.

Greetings
>
> Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060119/eb1fa5b9/attachment.html

Hi,

first thanks for your answer.
> This all depends on what sort of work your app is doing.  The # of
> requests you can handle per second will vary so widely that without a
> better idea of what you''re doing, it''s almost impossible
to say.
Hm yeah this is right of course.
>         
> 
> With enough server capacity, RoR can scale quite well.  Raw
> performance numbers are usually a bit lower than Java due to the fact
> that RoR is interpreted, while Java is byte-compiled.  Ruby is not the
> language to use if you need to eke out every last bit of performance
> from a given piece of hardware.  With the price of hardware nowadays,
> this is almost never an issue. 
Ok, but Ruby will have bytecode in the future too. So this is only a
disadvantage at the moment :) This will change I guess.
> Using FastCGI (maybe SCGI but I haven''t looked into it),  you can
> distribute RoR apps w/ load balancing across many servers.
This sounds really nice. Thanks

Mike
>

Scalability is manageable. Code that is completely obtuse and verbose
and just plain ugly is not. Use Ruby.

Mike Pence
Enterprise Java Developer

On 1/19/06, Michael Gebhart <lists@miketech.net>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> first thanks for your answer.
>
> > This all depends on what sort of work your app is doing.  The # of
> > requests you can handle per second will vary so widely that without a
> > better idea of what you''re doing, it''s almost
impossible to say.
>
> Hm yeah this is right of course.
> >
> >
> > With enough server capacity, RoR can scale quite well.  Raw
> > performance numbers are usually a bit lower than Java due to the fact
> > that RoR is interpreted, while Java is byte-compiled.  Ruby is not the
> > language to use if you need to eke out every last bit of performance
> > from a given piece of hardware.  With the price of hardware nowadays,
> > this is almost never an issue.
>
> Ok, but Ruby will have bytecode in the future too. So this is only a
> disadvantage at the moment :) This will change I guess.
>
> > Using FastCGI (maybe SCGI but I haven''t looked into it),  you
can
> > distribute RoR apps w/ load balancing across many servers.
>
> This sounds really nice. Thanks
>
> Mike
>
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>

Hi,

you are working with JavaEE? Do you use it at work? And in your free
time RoR? 

I''ve read some articles about the next version of struts, struts shale.
Have you ever heard about? Do you think, this will change the situation?
Or not?

Greetings

Mike
> Scalability is manageable. Code that is completely obtuse and verbose
> and just plain ugly is not. Use Ruby.
> 
> Mike Pence
> Enterprise Java Developer
> 
> On 1/19/06, Michael Gebhart <lists@miketech.net> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > first thanks for your answer.
> >
> > > This all depends on what sort of work your app is doing.  The #
of
> > > requests you can handle per second will vary so widely that
without a
> > > better idea of what you''re doing, it''s almost
impossible to say.
> >
> > Hm yeah this is right of course.
> > >
> > >
> > > With enough server capacity, RoR can scale quite well.  Raw
> > > performance numbers are usually a bit lower than Java due to the
fact
> > > that RoR is interpreted, while Java is byte-compiled.  Ruby is
not the
> > > language to use if you need to eke out every last bit of
performance
> > > from a given piece of hardware.  With the price of hardware
nowadays,
> > > this is almost never an issue.
> >
> > Ok, but Ruby will have bytecode in the future too. So this is only a
> > disadvantage at the moment :) This will change I guess.
> >
> > > Using FastCGI (maybe SCGI but I haven''t looked into it),
you can
> > > distribute RoR apps w/ load balancing across many servers.
> >
> > This sounds really nice. Thanks
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails mailing list
> > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>

I am a fulltime Java programmer but have recently switch to coding
rails at home. At work we spent a significant amount of time bringing
together and customizing Struts, Tiles, an ORM, Ant and JUnit into a
single cohesive package.

This was well before I knew anything about rails, and as you know,
rails comes with all this functionality built in and in a standardized
fashion to boot. Fairly depressing.

This means that comparing RoR to Struts (at least how Struts works
currently) is not adequate, because Struts does not contain a data
persistence layer, a pre-configured build process and a built-in
testing framework. All these pieces are scattered about various open
 source projects, albeit mostly of the Jakarta flavor.

Also Rails contains a more extensive "best-practices layer" in all its
components, meaning that it encourages you to write test cases and use
a automated build process from the start. You don''t have to get
discouraged trying to set a test harness, it just runs.

Some Java project may pop up that mimics RoR, but I''m not aware of any
that are there yet and that don''t use a godawful amount of XML in the
process. I am disallusion with Spring, at least for web projects. Some
PHP projects are around, but I haven''t messed with them yet.

My 2 cents.

-Theo


On 1/19/06, Michael Gebhart <lists@miketech.net>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> you are working with JavaEE? Do you use it at work? And in your free
> time RoR?
>
> I''ve read some articles about the next version of struts, struts
shale.
> Have you ever heard about? Do you think, this will change the situation?
> Or not?
>
> Greetings
>
> Mike
> > Scalability is manageable. Code that is completely obtuse and verbose
> > and just plain ugly is not. Use Ruby.
> >
> > Mike Pence
> > Enterprise Java Developer
> >
> > On 1/19/06, Michael Gebhart <lists@miketech.net> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > first thanks for your answer.
> > >
> > > > This all depends on what sort of work your app is doing. 
The # of
> > > > requests you can handle per second will vary so widely that
without a
> > > > better idea of what you''re doing, it''s
almost impossible to say.
> > >
> > > Hm yeah this is right of course.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > With enough server capacity, RoR can scale quite well.  Raw
> > > > performance numbers are usually a bit lower than Java due to
the fact
> > > > that RoR is interpreted, while Java is byte-compiled.  Ruby
is not the
> > > > language to use if you need to eke out every last bit of
performance
> > > > from a given piece of hardware.  With the price of hardware
nowadays,
> > > > this is almost never an issue.
> > >
> > > Ok, but Ruby will have bytecode in the future too. So this is
only a
> > > disadvantage at the moment :) This will change I guess.
> > >
> > > > Using FastCGI (maybe SCGI but I haven''t looked into
it),  you can
> > > > distribute RoR apps w/ load balancing across many servers.
> > >
> > > This sounds really nice. Thanks
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Rails mailing list
> > > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails mailing list
> > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>

Hi,

thanks for your answer. This helps me a little bit to decide. 

Normally I would use RoR for home, because I am really fast in
developing with it. 

But on the other hand: I would learn more with J2EE, because I don''t
have any experiences in J2EE, Struts and Co. Maybe this is more useful,
than simply bringing a new webproject up and running, because the
project is only for myself and not for a customer. 

Hm, difficult. 

Greetings

Mike

Same on pretty much all counts here. I have done a lot in the Java
space and most of the really cool stuff happening around Java is just
attempts to make Java dynamic. To make Java more like Ruby by all
kinds of abstractions around Java Beans, etc.

It gets so that every 100 lines of Java starts to look like 10 lines
of Ruby just waiting to pop out.

I am hoping that Rails will free me from that misery soon.

Best,
Mike Pence

On 1/19/06, Theodore Mills <twmills@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I am a fulltime Java programmer but have recently switch to coding
> rails at home. At work we spent a significant amount of time bringing
> together and customizing Struts, Tiles, an ORM, Ant and JUnit into a
> single cohesive package.
>
> This was well before I knew anything about rails, and as you know,
> rails comes with all this functionality built in and in a standardized
> fashion to boot. Fairly depressing.
>
> This means that comparing RoR to Struts (at least how Struts works
> currently) is not adequate, because Struts does not contain a data
> persistence layer, a pre-configured build process and a built-in
> testing framework. All these pieces are scattered about various open
>  source projects, albeit mostly of the Jakarta flavor.
>
> Also Rails contains a more extensive "best-practices layer" in
all its
> components, meaning that it encourages you to write test cases and use
> a automated build process from the start. You don''t have to get
> discouraged trying to set a test harness, it just runs.
>
> Some Java project may pop up that mimics RoR, but I''m not aware of
any
> that are there yet and that don''t use a godawful amount of XML in
the
> process. I am disallusion with Spring, at least for web projects. Some
> PHP projects are around, but I haven''t messed with them yet.
>
> My 2 cents.
>
> -Theo
>
>
> On 1/19/06, Michael Gebhart <lists@miketech.net> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > you are working with JavaEE? Do you use it at work? And in your free
> > time RoR?
> >
> > I''ve read some articles about the next version of struts,
struts shale.
> > Have you ever heard about? Do you think, this will change the
situation?
> > Or not?
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > Mike
> > > Scalability is manageable. Code that is completely obtuse and
verbose
> > > and just plain ugly is not. Use Ruby.
> > >
> > > Mike Pence
> > > Enterprise Java Developer
> > >
> > > On 1/19/06, Michael Gebhart <lists@miketech.net> wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > first thanks for your answer.
> > > >
> > > > > This all depends on what sort of work your app is
doing.  The # of
> > > > > requests you can handle per second will vary so widely
that without a
> > > > > better idea of what you''re doing,
it''s almost impossible to say.
> > > >
> > > > Hm yeah this is right of course.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > With enough server capacity, RoR can scale quite well. 
Raw
> > > > > performance numbers are usually a bit lower than Java
due to the fact
> > > > > that RoR is interpreted, while Java is byte-compiled. 
Ruby is not the
> > > > > language to use if you need to eke out every last bit
of performance
> > > > > from a given piece of hardware.  With the price of
hardware nowadays,
> > > > > this is almost never an issue.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, but Ruby will have bytecode in the future too. So this
is only a
> > > > disadvantage at the moment :) This will change I guess.
> > > >
> > > > > Using FastCGI (maybe SCGI but I haven''t looked
into it),  you can
> > > > > distribute RoR apps w/ load balancing across many
servers.
> > > >
> > > > This sounds really nice. Thanks
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Rails mailing list
> > > > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> > > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Rails mailing list
> > > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails mailing list
> > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>