On Mar 1, 2007, at 6:52 AM, dankelley wrote:
> I wonder whether anyone here can comment on the disappointing
> benchmarks for Rails, reported a few weeks ago at
>
> http://www.alrond.com/en/2007/feb/04/in-addition-to-the-test-of-mvc-
> frameworks/
Poor results? If those results had been available 1 year ago, nobody
would ever complain about RoR speed!
Nevertheless, I''ll repeat the mantra: Rails isn''t the fastest
framework. It''s built to be fast to develop, which is better and
cheaper for most people than being the most efficient deployment
platform.
You could, after all, write an Apache module in C to server your
entire application.
Now *that* would be *fast*! :-)
--
-- Tom Mornini, CTO
-- Engine Yard, Ruby on Rails Hosting
-- Reliability, Ease of Use, Scalability
-- (866) 518-YARD (9273)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---