I''ve got a RoR app that will be going to production soon (in the next month or so) and would like to get some feedback on what kind of web server setup people have had good luck with. I''m looking for something that is: 1. Stable 2. Easy to setup 3. Secure (sorry but Windows is ruled out here) My deployment will either be on Fedora Core 5 or possible Mac OS X Server. Currently I''ve been looking at Litespeed and their LSAPI integration and am tempted by that. I also have looked at Mongrel with Pound/Pens/Balance. I *could* do Apache 2.2 and Mongrel but want to avoid Apache if possible as I''d like to keep my memory contraints as low as possible and I''ve found Apache can be a bit of a memory hog (perhaps its my configuration - but I just don''t care to use Apache if need be). Thanks for all the feedback. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
On 7/7/06, Jacob Brent <jacobbr@hotmail.com> wrote:> I''ve got a RoR app that will be going to production soon (in the next > month or so) and would like to get some feedback on what kind of web > server setup people have had good luck with. I''m looking for something > that is: > 1. Stable > 2. Easy to setup > 3. Secure (sorry but Windows is ruled out here) > > My deployment will either be on Fedora Core 5 or possible Mac OS X > Server. Currently I''ve been looking at Litespeed and their LSAPI > integration and am tempted by that. I also have looked at Mongrel with > Pound/Pens/Balance. I *could* do Apache 2.2 and Mongrel but want to > avoid Apache if possible as I''d like to keep my memory contraints as low > as possible and I''ve found Apache can be a bit of a memory hog (perhaps > its my configuration - but I just don''t care to use Apache if need be).I think most people will agree that avoiding Apache for Rails work is a good idea unless you can get fcgi running instead of FastCGI. Regardless, Lighttpd seems to be the way to go nowadays but there are a _lot_ of people, myself included, who''re still using Apache2 + FastCGI and doing just fine. My two bits, Chuck Vose
> Regardless, Lighttpd seems to be the way to go nowadaysif you also need php from the same server process, yeah. if youre just load-balancing to mongrel there are lighter options. i would explain why i gave up on fcgi but zed has a more concise answer: 08:04 zedas#rubyonrails c, fastcgi has other issues besides install. it frequently zombies processes, has problems on restarts, leaks memory unless you have a per request GC call, and starts to get weird with the spawner/reaper stuff.> but there are > a _lot_ of people, myself included, who''re still using Apache2 + > FastCGI and doing just fine.
On Jul 8, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Chuck Vose wrote:> On 7/7/06, Jacob Brent <jacobbr@hotmail.com> wrote: >> I''ve got a RoR app that will be going to production soon (in the next >> month or so) and would like to get some feedback on what kind of web >> server setup people have had good luck with. I''m looking for >> something >> that is: >> 1. Stable >> 2. Easy to setup >> 3. Secure (sorry but Windows is ruled out here) >> >> My deployment will either be on Fedora Core 5 or possible Mac OS X >> Server. Currently I''ve been looking at Litespeed and their LSAPI >> integration and am tempted by that. I also have looked at Mongrel >> with >> Pound/Pens/Balance. I *could* do Apache 2.2 and Mongrel but want to >> avoid Apache if possible as I''d like to keep my memory contraints >> as low >> as possible and I''ve found Apache can be a bit of a memory hog >> (perhaps >> its my configuration - but I just don''t care to use Apache if need >> be). > > I think most people will agree that avoiding Apache for Rails work is > a good idea unless you can get fcgi running instead of FastCGI.I think you''re saying most people would agree avoiding Apache FCGI configuration that don''t work is a good idea. :-) Apache 2.2.2/mod_rewrite/mod_proxy_balancer/mod_proxy + mongrel rock. What''s the advantage of FCGI, other than that Lighty works better with FCGI than HTTP? -- -- Tom Mornini
thila thila
2006-Jul-08 23:56 UTC
[Rails] Re: Going to production soon, need server advice
Apache 2.2 + mod_proxy balancer + Mongrel cluster - Works like a charm; easy to scale. I know lot of people are afraid or sick of using apache; but it is a solid and a proven product. I dont want to try any of the new web servers just from a security point of view. Never user Apache with mod_fastcgi - Had too many issues; not worth risking yur career !! -Thila -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
once you decide on a configuration, be sure to smoke test everything... A good basic test is to pound the shit out of with a a couple of shell scripts that spawn a coulple thousand curl or wget process-es. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
On 7/8/06, Jon <root@localhost.net> wrote:> once you decide on a configuration, be sure to smoke test everything... > A good basic test is to pound the shit out of with a a couple of shell > scripts that spawn a coulple thousand curl or wget process-es.I can''t second this enough. Tests have saved my marriage (or they would have if I were married.) Seriously, the time spent fixing bugs was overwhelming my time spent coding until I started building tests religiously. They take time up front which is rarely a happy thing when it comes to the MBA types, but the difference between a bug fixed when you''re knee deep in the code and a bug found after release is unbelieveable. I haven''t been called into work afterhours once since starting testing... Cheers, Chuck Vose
Tim Perrett
2006-Jul-16 15:59 UTC
[Rails] Re: Re: Going to production soon, need server advice
Im running FC5 / Lighttpd / Rails / PHP / fcgi, no problem, works like a charm and is quick as hell. Others make a very valid point about testing... Look up a handy app called ''seige'', its for seige testing, will tell you how many concurrent hits it can take before it falls over - amongst other handy info! Cheers Tim -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.