Rails - Feb 2011 - Do you agree that as some point, every (big enough) Rails app sould not rely only on ActiveRecord?

Hi.

I''ve just read an interview of the CTO of Gowalla where they use Ruby
and
Rails: http://mashable.com/2011/02/23/ruby-on-rails-gowalla/
He says:

Every Rails app that I’ve ever worked on has had to break away from the 
“ActiveRecord way” at some point, for some part of the app. But it’s not an 
all-or-nothing question. Most of the time, the standard 
relational/ActiveRecord approach works perfectly well, and the convenience 
of following the Rails golden path is completely worthwhile. But most 
interesting apps will run into at least a few points where the standard 
tools break down, and you need to access your data differently.

What do you think? 

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@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.

On 24 February 2011 08:19, Michel Pigassou
<dagnan-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> Hi.
> I''ve just read an interview of the CTO of Gowalla where they use
Ruby and
> Rails:
>
> What do you think?
What''s to disagree with? Who on Earth would ever claim
"ActiveRecord
is all you''ll ever need"?

Like it says "Most of the time, the standard relational/ActiveRecord
approach works perfectly well [but] apps will run into at least a few
points where the standard tools break down"
Who hasn''t had to do do at least one find_by_sql to do some
cross-tabbing in the DB to save processing time?

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

He does not say that AR own methods are not enough, he says that an app 
needs to be based on AR and other other tool that are them selves based on 
NoSQL.

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

On 24 February 2011 09:24, Michel Pigassou
<dagnan-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> He does not say that AR own methods are not enough, he says that an app
> needs to be based on AR and other other tool that are them selves based on
> NoSQL.
And I still agree with him/the quote.
What''s to disagree with it? Do you think he might be wrong in his
assertion?

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

It''s not that I don''t agree, I just don''t have an
opinion on this matter and
asking for thoughts :)
Why Rails with a SQL db would not be enough to *always* scale an app?

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

On Feb 24, 5:09 am, Michel Pigassou
<dag...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> It''s not that I don''t agree, I just don''t have
an opinion on this matter and
> asking for thoughts :)
> Why Rails with a SQL db would not be enough to *always* scale an app?
The quotation does not claim that.  What it says is that the
ActiveRecord ORM does not handle every situation well.  Which can be
said of Ruby (or any other language, methodology, persistence store,
religious belief, etc.)  for that matter.

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@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.

Always use the best tool for the job. The evolution and scaling of Twitter 
is a good example of 
this:
http://highscalability.com/scaling-twitter-making-twitter-10000-percent-faster

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

Thank you all for your answers. Tricon your link seems interresting,
I''ll
read it tomorrow, thanks ;)

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

Hello,

I highly reccomend you DataMapper http://datamapper.org
because its code is beautiful,
have a helpful community http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper
you can immediately change Rails'' ORM with this adapter
https://github.com/datamapper/dm-rails

Also you may give a try for NoSQL:
MongoDB or CouchDB

There is not The Best DB and also not any Best ORM for sure. Depends
on your needs. Maybe ActiveRecord has smthg with foreign keys but Rein
gem can solve this issue as I heard(haven''t used since I''m fun
of DM):
http://github.com/nullobject/rein

cheers,
Zoli


On Mar 2, 6:23 pm, Michel Pigassou
<dag...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> Thank you all for your answers. Tricon your link seems interresting,
I''ll
> read it tomorrow, thanks ;)
-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@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.