On 05/12/2011, at 9:45 AM, Simon Russell wrote: > You actually want to do callbacks it would seem, so em-synchrony isn't > actually necessary -- that's actually designed to hide the callbacks, > and make it seem more like straightforward single-threaded code.
No, no. I do want to hide all callbacks and make the code look like the sequential set of commands. I also want to be able to swap it out for a single-threaded implementation as a backup if something goes wrong. > It is actually possible to run an EventMachine event loop inside > Passenger (or other process-based servers) -- you just need to start > up the event loop in a separate thread on app initialisation. But wouldn't it raise "non-local return error" when used with Rails as Richard explained previously? > It might only be useful if you actually are doing multiple HTTP > backend requests that can be done in parallel; > It won't actually make your server any more capable of > serving more requests at once, it just might make the requests faster > to serve. That's the whole point of this buggy wuggy dance. Most likely there will be at least 3 HTTP requests. So parallelising this should improve the response times. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" 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/rails-oceania?hl=en.
