Rails - Mar 2006 - Mongrel Web Server 0.3.11 -- Edge Rails and Win32Compliant

I don''t think there''s a way to do that other than using a
proxy
(ISAPI_REWRITE) or just a server-side redirect. I''d love to be proven
wrong though.
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org
[mailto:rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org] On Behalf Of frazer horn
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 9:13 AM
To: rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
Subject: Re: [Rails] Mongrel Web Server 0.3.11 -- Edge Rails and
Win32Compliant


Hi Zed

I am about to try Mongrel on windows and hope to use it in production
for a project.  Is it possible to use Mongrel with iis?   If so is there
any information on how to?

Sorry in advance if this is a stupid question!! 

Thanks

Fraz




On 3/15/06, Zed Shaw <zedshaw@zedshaw.com> wrote: 

	Hello Folks,
	
	This is the big release of Mongrel that''s been in the works for
a while now
	(well, like a week).  It is chock full of changes and features,
but mostly
	it syncs up the Win32 side of things, and validates that Edge
Rails works 
	without problems.  It also features a more extensive and useful
example of
	the GemPlugins called mongrel_config.
	
	First the usual stuff for people without a clue.
	
	WHAT IS MONGREL?
	
	Mongrel is a small fast little web server project trying to
bring the speed 
	of FastCGI and the simplicity of WEBrick for deploying any Ruby
web
	application.  It already supports Ruby on Rails, Camping, and
Nitro and
	could soon support IOWA.  Since it is a regular old HTTP based
server it can 
	be clustered, manipulated, and deployed like any other web
server you use.
	
	Check out the nifty website at:
	
	http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/
	
	
	TOP 10 REASONS TO USE MONGREL 
	
	10) It''s damn fast without being a pain to install.
	9) It works on tons of platforms with active testing on Win32,
FreeBSD,
	Linux, OSX, and NetBSD.
	8) It is probably the very best deployment solution for people
doing Win32 
	Rails development, especially since it actively supports windows
services
	and has a reasonably nice management tool.
	7) It''s fast enough that you could probably run your small to
medium size
	Ruby web applications using just Mongrel and be perfectly happy.

	6) It actively supports Rails style page caching which could
give your
	application a major performance boost without any extra
deployment effort.
	5) It uses an insanely correct HTTP parser which I''ve found
blocks quite a 
	few exploits.  This parser is also what makes Mongrel so Fast.
	4) It has a great plugin system that lets you package your
extensions as
	gems and your users just "gem install and go".
	3) It is LGPL so you thieves can make money (but I get Mongrel
mods back!) 
	2) It supports and uses Camping.  Camping is cool.
	
	And the best reason to use Mongrel is...
	
	1) Isn''t a cool name like Mongrel enough?
	
	
	INSTALLING
	
	You might need sudo, you *will* need Ruby 1.8.4, and you''ll need
a compiler
	(unless you''re on win32).
	
	Simple enough.  If you have mongrel already try "gem upgrade".
If that
	causes problems then you might have to clear out gem_plugin,
mongrel, 
	mongrel_config, and mongrel_status.  This is rare and typically
only if
	people have been tracking my development.
	
	For newbies just do this:
	
	$ gem install mongrel
	$ gem install mongrel_config
	$ gem install mongrel_status  (if you want this) 
	
	That''s it.
	
	
	NEW STUFF TO TRY IN 0.3.11
	
	The 0.3.11 release features edge Rails support, some great
functionality,
	big stability improvements, some good docs for folks to start
using, and
	finally the beginning of a config tool implemented as a
GemPlugin.  Most 
	importantly it completely supports Win32 again and the
mongrel_config tool
	actually works *better* in Win32.
	
	= Documentation
	
	If you haven''t seen it yet, check out
	http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/docs/lighttpd.html For a good set
of docs for
	getting Mongrel up in a very fast production deployment running
on one
	machine.
	
	Check out http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/docs/gem_plugin.html for
docs on
	writing your very own mongrel_rails commands as gem plugins.
The ability to
	write your own handlers, filters, and potentially whole
applications as
	plugins coming soon.  Adventurous people could try doing a rails
plugin by
	adding "rails" as a dependency on their plugin gem.
	
	Especially check out the gpgen tool for getting a mongrel plugin
up with
	minimal effort.
	
	== Edge Rails
	
	This release was tested with Edge Rails and several
applications, but I''d be
	interested in more people living on the edge.
	
	== Config Tool
	
	If you''re on Unix (OSX too) or Windows you now have a new thing
to play 
	with: mongrel_config.  Once you install the mongrel_config gem
you get a new
	command for mongrel_rails.  You can try it two ways depending on
your
	platform:
	
	UNIX:
	    1) cd myrailsapp
	    2) $ mongrel_rails configtool 
	    3) Hit the web page it says and try starting and stopping
your rails
	app.
	
	WIN32:
	    1) $ mongrel_rails configtool
	    2) Hit the web page and install new services, delete them,
start them,
	stop them, check out the start/stop logs, and view all of the
service''s 
	parameters.  Yeah, win32 wins on this one.
	
	And yes, win32 configtool doesn''t need to be in any rails
directory, which
	means smart people will make a simple link that runs this in
order to manage
	their rails apps services. 
	
	== Camping
	
	Mongrel now supports Camping a lot better and uses it
extensively in the
	mongrel_config plugin.   Camping is _why''s little
micro-framework for doing
	web applications.  It''s perfect for little tools like the
mongrel_config 
	plugin.
	
	If you''re interested in writing a little application and
don''t
want a full
	Rails app then try looking at the code to mongrel_config to get
an idea.  It
	works great, the only thing is that there''s tons of PFM in
Camping that 
	seems to break Rails like crazy.  Camping == oil.  Rails =water. 
Don''t
	mix.
	
	== The Dreaded TCP Hack
	
	Sean Treadway gave me a bit of hack code which jacks the OS
listen queue
	from the default (usually 5) to a whopping 1024.  This makes
Mongrel handle 
	concurrency much better.  Give it a try and let me know how it
works for
	you.
	
	
	THE FUTURE
	
	I''ll be writing the filters feature and finally the
configuration file that
	will let you configure any handlers and filters from a .yaml
file.  This is 
	needed so that people can write plugins to give you special
filters,
	handlers, or whole applications (similar to configtool).
	
	After this I''ll be talking with Luis to see if we can
consolidate the
	mongrel_rails_service and mongrel_rails by using the plugin
system to 
	implement the commands.  We''ll also look at making the
mongrel_config more
	advanced.
	
	Finally I''m talking with the IOWA folks to roll their web app
into the
	Mongrel kennel.  Fun stuff!
	
	Enjoy the release and feel free to shoot me your problems,
praise, and any 
	features requests.
	
	Zed A. Shaw
	http://www.zedshaw.com/
	
	_______________________________________________
	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/20060315/986fb622/attachment-0001.html

You folks should take a look at the Pound reverse proxy:

http://www.apsis.ch/pound/

It is designed to sit in front of a group of web servers and redirect based
on cookies and paths and such.  It could sit in front on IIS and several
mongrel servers and then route the requests as needed.  It is actually
designed to work with IIS and can even handle the majority of the IIS WebDav
capabilities.  It can also give you SSL which is nice for things like
Mongrel which don?t to SSL (yet).

Zed A. Shaw
http://www.zedshaw.com/



On 3/15/06 10:57 AM, "Hogan, Brian P." <HOGANBP@uwec.edu> wrote:
> I don''t think there''s a way to do that other than using a
proxy
> (ISAPI_REWRITE) or just a server-side redirect. I''d love to be
proven wrong
> though.
>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org
> [mailto:rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org] On Behalf Of frazer horn
> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 9:13 AM
> To: rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> Subject: Re: [Rails] Mongrel Web Server 0.3.11 -- Edge Rails and
> Win32Compliant
> 
> Hi Zed
> 
> I am about to try Mongrel on windows and hope to use it in production for a
> project.  Is it possible to use Mongrel with iis?   If so is there any
> information on how to?
> 
> Sorry in advance if this is a stupid question!!
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Fraz
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060316/2762f743/attachment.html

I''d just like to chime in here by saying that Pound is ridiculously
awesome.
If you''ve got an HTTP problem that can''t be solved with Pound
and/or
Balance, you''re probably better off challenging your lead developer to
a knife fight.

On 3/15/06, Zed Shaw <zedshaw@zedshaw.com> wrote:
>  You folks should take a look at the Pound reverse proxy:
>
>  http://www.apsis.ch/pound/
>
>  It is designed to sit in front of a group of web servers and redirect
based
> on cookies and paths and such.  It could sit in front on IIS and several
> mongrel servers and then route the requests as needed.  It is actually
> designed to work with IIS and can even handle the majority of the IIS
WebDav
> capabilities.  It can also give you SSL which is nice for things like
> Mongrel which don''t to SSL (yet).
>
>
>  Zed A. Shaw
>  http://www.zedshaw.com/
>
>
>
>  On 3/15/06 10:57 AM, "Hogan, Brian P." <HOGANBP@uwec.edu>
wrote:
>
>
>
> I don''t think there''s a way to do that other than using a
proxy
> (ISAPI_REWRITE) or just a server-side redirect. I''d love to be
proven wrong
> though.
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org
> [mailto:rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org] On Behalf Of
> frazer horn
>  Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 9:13 AM
>  To: rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
>  Subject: Re: [Rails] Mongrel Web Server 0.3.11 -- Edge Rails and
> Win32Compliant
>
>  Hi Zed
>
>  I am about to try Mongrel on windows and hope to use it in production for
a
> project.  Is it possible to use Mongrel with iis?   If so is there any
> information on how to?
>
>  Sorry in advance if this is a stupid question!!
>
>  Thanks
>
>  Fraz
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>
>
>

You haven''t seen my lead developer''s knife ... It''s
about 39 inches long
highly tempered steel.   :o)

Of course he doesn''t design things so that you can be coded into a
corner either.

On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 22:39 -0500, Wilson Bilkovich
wrote:
> I''d just like to chime in here by saying that Pound is
ridiculously
> awesome.
> If you''ve got an HTTP problem that can''t be solved with
Pound and/or
> Balance, you''re probably better off challenging your lead
developer to
> a knife fight.
>

Hi Zed, any chance you could also include a light script to run
mongrel for rails without requiring rubygems, I used to be able to
just comment out the "require rubygems" line in the script but now it
no longer works, since you''ve introduced the Gem Plugin.
I know I could just RTFM and write a script myself, but I thought the
goal of Mongrel was to keep thing simple and fast.

Gael


On 16/03/06, David Johnson <johnson_d@cox.net>
wrote:
> You haven''t seen my lead developer''s knife ...
It''s about 39 inches long
> highly tempered steel.   :o)
>
> Of course he doesn''t design things so that you can be coded into a
> corner either.
>
> On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 22:39 -0500, Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
> > I''d just like to chime in here by saying that Pound is
ridiculously
> > awesome.
> > If you''ve got an HTTP problem that can''t be solved
with Pound and/or
> > Balance, you''re probably better off challenging your lead
developer to
> > a knife fight.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>

I did some basic speed test on my rails application. I use Centrino 
1.7GHz, WinXP.
For simple test I used Apache ''ab -n 100 -c 10 http://url....
''

Running Mongrel 0.3.11 I got:
development env. = 4.5 req./sec
production env. = 11.5 req./sec

Running Webrick I got:
development env. = 5.7 req./sec
production env. =25.9 req./sec


Does anyone know why the webrick is still faster? Mongrel runs without 
problem but quite slow. Cant see any advantage to webrick.

David Marko

PS: I run rails edge, Ruby 1.8.4




-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

I''ll look at it.  Is there a particular thing that gems is doing which
makes
it painful for you?

Zed A. Shaw
http://www.zedshaw.com/


On 3/16/06 3:46 AM, "Gael Pourriel" <gael.pourriel@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Zed, any chance you could also include a light script to run
> mongrel for rails without requiring rubygems, I used to be able to
> just comment out the "require rubygems" line in the script but
now it
> no longer works, since you''ve introduced the Gem Plugin.
> I know I could just RTFM and write a script myself, but I thought the
> goal of Mongrel was to keep thing simple and fast.
> 
> Gael
>

On 17/03/06, Zed Shaw <zedshaw@zedshaw.com> wrote:
> I''ll look at it.  Is there a particular thing that gems is doing
which makes
> it painful for you?
Not really, but Mongrel itself doesn''t really need gems, it''s
only the
since you introduced the gem_plugin that you need it. It might be
handy to have a lite version without the plugin for people who dont
need plugins...hence dont need Rubygems

I''m just worried that if you start requiring more and more external
libraries in order to run Mongrel people would just start to think it
becomes a big gas factory with tons of add-ons that people barely use,
you may as well use Lighttpd + FastCGI...

I like Mongrel because it is simple and just run out of the shelf
without going through tons of docs to find out how to get it running
and it performs well.

Gael

On 3/17/06, Zed Shaw <zedshaw@zedshaw.com> wrote:
> I''ll look at it.  Is there a particular thing that gems is doing
which makes
> it painful for you?
If I understand it correctly it requires Ruby 1.8.4 and Ubuntu Linux
comes with 1.8.3 and it''s a pain to upgrade.

PS. If anyone knows a nice and easy way to get Ruby 1.8.4 running on
Breezy, Ubuntu 5.10 please tell me. DS.

--
Jonas Elfstr?m

Hijacking threads arn''t you.

There was a post yesterday from Jason Stewart
<jstewart@rtl.org>:
> On 25/03/06 13:00 +0000, Nicholas H.Tollervey wrote:
>   
>> > Hi,
>> > 
>> > I''ve just been caught out with this. 
>> > 
>> > On any Debian based distro (like ubuntu) always install Ruby via
apt,
>> > install gems from source and then gem install rake and rails (and
so
>> > on). 
>> > 
>> > The problem with Breezy is that although the Ruby version is 1.8.2
the
>> > ruby package reports it being 1.8.3 which Rails won''t
play with. As a
>> > result, you have only one option:
>> > 
>> > Upgrade to Dapper Drake. 
>> >
>>     
>
> Not really. You could always build ruby from source. I don''t like
the
> way Debian breaks ruby into different parts anyway.
>
> First remove any ruby stuff you have already installed on breezy, then
> get checkinstall and build-essential
>
> sudo apt-get install checkinstall
> sudo apt-get install build-essential
>
> Then go out and get the source for ruby and rubygems, untar them, run
> ./configure, make, then
> sudo checkinstall make install
>
> after this yo uwill have the latest ruby and rubygems built from
> source and tracked in Debian''s package system.
>
> Regards,
> Jason
> ______
Jonas Elfstr?m schreef:
> On 3/17/06, Zed Shaw <zedshaw@zedshaw.com> wrote:
>   
>> I''ll look at it.  Is there a particular thing that gems is
doing which makes
>> it painful for you?
>>     
>
> If I understand it correctly it requires Ruby 1.8.4 and Ubuntu Linux
> comes with 1.8.3 and it''s a pain to upgrade.
>
> PS. If anyone knows a nice and easy way to get Ruby 1.8.4 running on
> Breezy, Ubuntu 5.10 please tell me. DS.
>
> --
> Jonas Elfstr?m
>
>