Hello all, I''m a new Ruby on Rails developer who is working on applications for several different clients using the Ruby on Rails framework. The question that I''ve got to pose all of you concerns the differences between mod_ruby and FastCGI. I''m thinking about trying to get my webhost to install mod_ruby because it would run lightyears faster, but there''s something I found about mod_ruby that they would probably take issue with. On the Wikipedia article for mod_ruby, it reads: "Its drawback is that the characteristic sharing of classes among Apache processes is not safe for multiple applications." However, there is no citation. So here''s my question - is this a serious safety concern? If so, how did the developers of mod_php get around this problem? Is there another, more secure, solution to running ruby apps on a web server that is faster than mod_ruby? Thanks in advance, Matt --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Don''t think anyone uses either of those these days. It''s either mod_rails or mongrel Sent from my iPhone On 28 Nov 2008, at 17:53, Matt <matt.foxtrot-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Hello all, > > I''m a new Ruby on Rails developer who is working on applications for > several different clients using the Ruby on Rails framework. The > question that I''ve got to pose all of you concerns the differences > between mod_ruby and FastCGI. I''m thinking about trying to get my > webhost to install mod_ruby because it would run lightyears faster, > but there''s something I found about mod_ruby that they would probably > take issue with. > > On the Wikipedia article for mod_ruby, it reads: "Its drawback is that > the characteristic sharing of classes among Apache processes is not > safe for multiple applications." However, there is no citation. > > So here''s my question - is this a serious safety concern? If so, how > did the developers of mod_php get around this problem? Is there > another, more secure, solution to running ruby apps on a web server > that is faster than mod_ruby? > > Thanks in advance, > Matt > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I will say stay away from FastCGI, that''s all. H On Nov 28, 3:43 pm, Frederick Cheung <frederick.che...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Don''t think anyone uses either of those these days. It''s either > mod_rails or mongrel > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 28 Nov 2008, at 17:53, Matt <matt.foxt...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > I''m a new Ruby on Rails developer who is working on applications for > > several different clients using the Ruby on Rails framework. The > > question that I''ve got to pose all of you concerns the differences > > between mod_ruby and FastCGI. I''m thinking about trying to get my > > webhost to install mod_ruby because it would run lightyears faster, > > but there''s something I found about mod_ruby that they would probably > > take issue with. > > > On the Wikipedia article for mod_ruby, it reads: "Its drawback is that > > the characteristic sharing of classes among Apache processes is not > > safe for multiple applications." However, there is no citation. > > > So here''s my question - is this a serious safety concern? If so, how > > did the developers of mod_php get around this problem? Is there > > another, more secure, solution to running ruby apps on a web server > > that is faster than mod_ruby? > > > Thanks in advance, > > Matt--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
You are really going to want to take a look at mongrel, thin, or ... my perference ... Passenger/mod_rails. Just type http://modrails.com into your browser window and be amazed. ;) On Nov 28, 11:53 am, Matt <matt.foxt...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Hello all, > > I''m a new Ruby on Rails developer who is working on applications for > several different clients using the Ruby on Rails framework. The > question that I''ve got to pose all of you concerns the differences > between mod_ruby and FastCGI. I''m thinking about trying to get my > webhost to install mod_ruby because it would run lightyears faster, > but there''s something I found about mod_ruby that they would probably > take issue with. > > On the Wikipedia article for mod_ruby, it reads: "Its drawback is that > the characteristic sharing of classes among Apache processes is not > safe for multiple applications." However, there is no citation. > > So here''s my question - is this a serious safety concern? If so, how > did the developers of mod_php get around this problem? Is there > another, more secure, solution to running ruby apps on a web server > that is faster than mod_ruby? > > Thanks in advance, > Matt--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Or my new favorite JRuby with Glassfish... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
False. My webhost currently has us using FastCGI to run our Rails scripts. I may shoot them an email asking about mod_rails though. On Nov 28, 3:43 pm, Frederick Cheung <frederick.che...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Don''t think anyone uses either of those these days. It''s either > mod_rails or mongrel > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 28 Nov 2008, at 17:53, Matt <matt.foxt...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > I''m a new Ruby on Rails developer who is working on applications for > > several different clients using the Ruby on Rails framework. The > > question that I''ve got to pose all of you concerns the differences > > between mod_ruby and FastCGI. I''m thinking about trying to get my > > webhost to install mod_ruby because it would run lightyears faster, > > but there''s something I found about mod_ruby that they would probably > > take issue with. > > > On the Wikipedia article for mod_ruby, it reads: "Its drawback is that > > the characteristic sharing of classes among Apache processes is not > > safe for multiple applications." However, there is no citation. > > > So here''s my question - is this a serious safety concern? If so, how > > did the developers of mod_php get around this problem? Is there > > another, more secure, solution to running ruby apps on a web server > > that is faster than mod_ruby? > > > Thanks in advance, > > Matt--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---