On Jan 22, 2008 10:07 AM, Kirk Haines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 22, 2008 7:46 AM, John Almberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am running a number of Rails apps on a quite powerful server (dual > > quad-core xeons, 8G ram, raid 10) running FreeBSD. I'm using a fairly > > simple software stack: Apache22, mod_proxy, and a single mongrel > > instance for each website. Apache is serving all static content. > . > > The websites are extremely fast-loading, apparently very stable > > (nothing has failed in the month or so since I've switched over from > > a FastCGI setup), and I love the simplicity. > > I concur. > > > My question: This was supposed to be a first step towards using a > > mongrel cluster, but the single mongrel instance seems to work > > perfectly fine. Can I keep using it, as long as the loads stay at > > modest levels? I don't want to move to a more complex set up just > > because it would be cool or fun to do. If a single instance will do > > the job, then simple is better, IMHO. > > You can absolutely keep running things that way. I've ran the same > sort of sites for years, and the vast majority of them have been done > is exactly that way. It works just fine, and IMHO, more people should > be deploying Rails apps in that sort of simple manner.
This is an interesting discussion. The conclusions are a bit confusing to me. John-- you say that your sites get a few thousand hits a day. With only one mongrel, can't the system only serve one request at a time? It seems like, independent of system performance, just the fact that the requests have to be done sequentially would have a big hit on the performance on the site. Is this not the case, that with one mongrel, only one request can be served at a time? John -- John Joseph Bachir http://blog.johnjosephbachir.org http://lyceum.ibiblio.org http://dissent.cc http://jjb.cc _______________________________________________ Mongrel-users mailing list Mongrel-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
