Rails - Aug 2006 - Platform performance comparisons

I''m in the process of developing a Rails application.  Currently there
is
some debate as to the final deployment platform.  I''m in favor of using
some
flavor of linux.  However, there are some more "risk averse"
co-workers who
would prefer to deploy on Windows and, more specifically, IIS.  I have heard
that Ruby is much slower on Windows than Linux, but I have been unable to
find any concrete performance comparisons of either Ruby or Ruby On Rails on
Windows vs Linux.

Does anyone know of any comparisons that have been done in the past?  I
would prefer to not have to create my own benchmarks, if at all possible,
but would rather verify third party benchmarks.

Thanks,

Jeremiah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060806/031b6868/attachment.html

Jeremiah we are ourselfs a dev team working on different platforms, and so far
the test runs show a destructive slow down on windows. On my machine I run our
tests 4 times faster in linux then in Windows. I can only attribute that to the
ruby windows implementation. 

Good Luck 
nemlah

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org 
> [mailto:rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org] On Behalf Of Nemlah
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 9:40 AM
> To: rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> Subject: [Rails] Re: Platform performance comparisons
> 
> 
> Jeremiah we are ourselfs a dev team working on different 
> platforms, and so far the test runs show a destructive slow 
> down on windows. On my machine I run our tests 4 times faster 
> in linux then in Windows. I can only attribute that to the 
> ruby windows implementation. 
> 
> Good Luck 
> nemlah
My personal observations indicate that the Windows FS is relatively
slower than Linux (and, frankly, every other FS I''ve ever benchmarked
against).  I don''t think it''s just the Ruby implementation
(which is
just using the posix compatible functions underneath the hood afaik),
but I''ve noticed similar results using Perl.  Note that there *used to
be* issues with the Ruby implementation back in the 1.6.x days, but
those were addressed.

I''ve even written pretty straightforward wrappers for native Win32 API
functions (e.g. CreateFile), and it was actually a little *slower* than
the current implementation in Ruby.  And before any Windows folks get
their panties in a bunch, I actually head the Win32 Utils project, so
I''m not some random Windows basher.  Of course, using the native
functions does let you do things like asynchronous IO, but that''s
another topic.

In my own very informal and never-to-be-published benchmarks, FreeBSD
actually performed the best on identical hardware (I was using a
multi-boot setup).  On a side note, I''ve heard that the Vista FS is
supposed to be much improved.

Regards,

Dan


This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication 
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy 
all copies of the communication and any attachments.

Jeremiah:

I''m writing the chapter on Windows deployment for the upcoming Rails
Deployment book... here''s what i can tell you:

1. Rails (and Ruby) apps run slower on Windows. How much slower depends on
your box.  I''ve got a 700mhz Ubuntu setup that performs as well as a
dual
2ghz Xeon setup running Windows 2003 Server.   However, I also have an AMD
Sempron based laptop (1.8 ghz) that runs my Rails apps just as fast as my
700mhz Linux machine. You have to do the tests yourself, and I recommend
httperf as a benchmarking tool for web apps.

2. IIS can''t be used to deploy Rails, but you can use proxy tools like
ISAPI_Rewrite. I have some guides on my site that can get you started
integrating IIS + Mongrel into your organization.  You can eventually move
from Mongrel on Windows to Mongrel on Linux and still serve requests through
IIS. This setup will be addressed in the book.

Feel free to ask any other questions.. I''m here to help.

-Brian

On 8/11/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com>
wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org
> > [mailto:rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org] On Behalf Of Nemlah
> > Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 9:40 AM
> > To: rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> > Subject: [Rails] Re: Platform performance comparisons
> >
> >
> > Jeremiah we are ourselfs a dev team working on different
> > platforms, and so far the test runs show a destructive slow
> > down on windows. On my machine I run our tests 4 times faster
> > in linux then in Windows. I can only attribute that to the
> > ruby windows implementation.
> >
> > Good Luck
> > nemlah
>
> My personal observations indicate that the Windows FS is relatively
> slower than Linux (and, frankly, every other FS I''ve ever
benchmarked
> against).  I don''t think it''s just the Ruby
implementation (which is
> just using the posix compatible functions underneath the hood afaik),
> but I''ve noticed similar results using Perl.  Note that there
*used to
> be* issues with the Ruby implementation back in the 1.6.x days, but
> those were addressed.
>
> I''ve even written pretty straightforward wrappers for native Win32
API
> functions (e.g. CreateFile), and it was actually a little *slower* than
> the current implementation in Ruby.  And before any Windows folks get
> their panties in a bunch, I actually head the Win32 Utils project, so
> I''m not some random Windows basher.  Of course, using the native
> functions does let you do things like asynchronous IO, but that''s
> another topic.
>
> In my own very informal and never-to-be-published benchmarks, FreeBSD
> actually performed the best on identical hardware (I was using a
> multi-boot setup).  On a side note, I''ve heard that the Vista FS
is
> supposed to be much improved.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>
>
> This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential
> or
> privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication
> in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
> all copies of the communication and any attachments.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20060812/97e59646/attachment.html