I'm going to correct myself - there are some cases for using Thin. On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Stewart Mckinney <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey, just as an FYI, you probably aren't going to get anything out of > comparing these frameworks in anything but "production server mode". > > For Rails's case at the very least, literally no one runs a web site on > WEBrick or Thin. Most configurations use Unicorn , Puma, or Passenger > and/or NGINX. You'll probably get more mileage out of comparing the > different server options than development mode on Rails, which is > engineered to be the opposite of fast for ease of development. > > For sake of completeness, as well, I would include the .conf files for > Apache that were used for the comparison. It's not really telling a full > story unless we know configuration values - thread pooling/# of threads can > tell a large part as to why these benchmarks are so different. Things like > # of persistent connections to the DB can also effect these numbers ( if > 1000 threads are waiting on 5 connections, everyone is sad ), and should > probably also be up front. > > > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Darren Daly <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I was under a time constraint with this project, but may consider doing >> that in the future. >> >> >> On Monday, April 6, 2015 at 2:27:21 AM UTC+1, gvim wrote: >>> >>> On 05/04/2015 14:00, Darren Daly wrote: >>> > Hi all, >>> > >>> > For my final year project I have been comparing web frameworks to get >>> > performance benchmarks that others can then use when deciding upon a >>> web >>> > framework. The idea is simple; first you build the same simple >>> > applications in another web framework and then use the tests that I >>> > provide. You then compare your results against my benchmarks to help >>> in >>> > making a decision on your chosen web framework. I started out with 3 >>> web >>> > frameworks; Ruby on Rails, Chicago Boss and Flask. I chose Rails >>> because >>> > of its status as the go to web framework, Boss because of its fast >>> > growing popularity and because of its Erlang implementation and >>> finally >>> > Flask because it is very different to the first two in that it is a >>> > "bare bones" web micro-framework. The findings are interesting and can >>> > be seen here: >>> > http://web-framework-comparison.blogspot.ie/2015/ >>> 04/benchmarks-i-am-final-year-student-in.html >>> > <http://web-framework-comparison.blogspot.ie/2015/ >>> 04/benchmarks-i-am-final-year-student-in.html> >>> > >>> > Thanks for taking the time to read this and hopefully it might be of >>> > some benefit. >>> > >>> > Darren Daly. >>> > >>> >>> I think you should also consider including Laravel (PHP), Phoenix >>> (Elixir) and Luminus (Clojure). >>> >>> gvim >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-talk/50b4c6bf-2f2d-471f-a86f-bb1eea95945d%40googlegroups.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-talk/50b4c6bf-2f2d-471f-a86f-bb1eea95945d%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-talk/CA%2BCQ936p0_sHF5uv3z%3DBum39Hmk5UK9kzNAgYcKKb7wJxPoDuw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
