http://www.modrails.com/
Never had stability issues with Rails I haven't introduced with my own code, but your mileage may vary. On Nov 16, 8:20 pm, Roland Mai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have been away from Rails for a year now, but I have been maintaining > a site which runs on rails. It's still hosted on textdrive served by > lighttpd with fastcgi. There's something inherently wrong with fastcgi > and file uploading. Something about an end of line issue, but mongrel > kept dieing too. > > The site keeps on crashing, so I have scripts running that basically > restart the webservice every so often, but that's just unacceptable for > more serious work. I can't go to a client and explain what the error > was. They don't care. > > The site uses RMagick to resize images and does some basic file > uploading. I have been in the PHP world for a year now, and I feel that > PHP is much more stable and portable than Rails. I am at a loss at > finding any good reasons to choose Rails, other than I like the Ruby > language. > > Rails is not as portable as PHP. The sites are generally slow because > they require a bunch of CPU and shared environments don't have the > resources. My compromise so far is that Rails is very demanding for > small projects. > > Do you know of any reasons that makes Rails well suited for small > projects and I don't mean microsites or brochure sites. > -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
