At 15:28 -0600 1/28/09, Yehuda Katz wrote: > I still think you're crazy, but I now understand what > you're trying to do.
cool > I think what you want is likely something we'd want to add > a hook for at the framework level (and actually have > discussed this before... each request running in its own > process). You'd probably want to run with thin (or in a > non-threaded environment) and make sure nginx was set up to > redispatch any requests that came back from a disconnected > backend. Sounds useful. In any case, it's extremely useful to know that Merb currently can't do what I need. In the meanwhile, EZ gave me some help toward creating a Rack-based CGI script that will start up a new process for each request. I'm not delighted by the overhead of starting up Ruby each time, nor with losing access to the Merb environment, but that's life. If Merb (or Rails 3) comes up with a better answer, I'd love to try it (to keep the number of frameworks down :-). -r -- http://www.cfcl.com/rdm Rich Morin http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume [email protected] http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/weblog +1 650-873-7841 Technical editing and writing, programming, and web development --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
