Robert Walker wrote: > Michael Rigart wrote: >> I' running in production. I have noticed that development is slower then >> production, but the production speed is still far from acceptable. The >> diffrence between using ActiveRecord and ActiveResource is huge. > > Yep, web services are generally much slower than SQL calls. There a lot > more work to do. Think about something like the Music store built into > iTunes that uses web services heavily. It's not exactly stellar > performance. > > Who knows. Things like the work going into Rails 2.3 with RACK and METAL > may provide some opportunity to optimize ActiveResource, but I doubt > we'll ever see comparable performance between ActiveRecord (or other > ORMs) and ActiveResource. Improvements to ActiveResource will likely go > hand-in-hand with improvements to ActiveRecord so the gap will remain. > > Can you define "huge?" Do you have any benchmarks. That might help > people here know whether it's really a problem or just basically > "normal."
Thank you Robert. I know that web services will always be slower then connecting directly to the DB. But I have worked with external webservices from third parties and my webservice is way to slow. I have tested it again with a small benchmark by pulling a list of 50 items and displaying them. It took 28733ms to pull the data over and display them on screen. I know it's not a server or network problem. Thank you in for your patience -- Posted via http://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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
