On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 6:34 AM, Trevor Vaughan <tvaug...@onyxpoint.com> wrote: > Passenger should be about 30% faster and has built-in memory > management via mod-rack. > > This is a huge plus if you have a lot of nodes or limited memory. > > Also, you stop having problems with Apache getting out of sync with > the puppetmaster if you restart the puppetmaster processes without > also restarting Apache.
++ I found it incredibly difficult to write robust babysitter processes for anything + multiple mongrels. It's much simpler to manage apache with passenger. > > Trevor > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Christopher Johnston > <chjoh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Mongrel was very easy to setup as the packages are all available in Fedora. >> I was able to fire up a puppetmaster on most of the cpu cores I have on my >> system to scale the load out a bit more. I have yet to try passenger. But I >> think more importantly what is the "fastest" and most "scalable" solution. >> I have heard/read that Mongrel (and older ruby) have had memory leaks, but >> not sure if thats still true today on current versions. >> -Chris >> >> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Michael DeHaan <mich...@reductivelabs.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Smain Kahlouch <smain...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > Hi everybody, >>> > >>> > I just want to know what is the best web server between passenger and >>> > mongrel. >>> > I don't understand what are the benefits of each solution. >>> > >>> > Do you have a part of the answer please? >>> >>> We seem to be directing folks to passenger if they are running a new >>> enough Puppet in the docs, yet this seems to conflict: >>> >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/puppet-users@googlegroups.com/msg04745.html >>> (any updates on this?) >>> >>> I agree with the need to choose one performant "default suggestion" >>> and not leave someone with the task of evaluating/testing lots of >>> options. >>> >>> --Michael >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Puppet Users" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Puppet Users" group. >> To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > Trevor Vaughan > Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc > (410) 541-6699 > tvaug...@onyxpoint.com > > -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information -- > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Users" group. > To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. > > -- nigel -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
