I hear you on that. Thanks for your time! EG
On Aug 19, 1:38 pm, Matt Harrison <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 10:29:57AM -0700, elliottg wrote: > > > Thanks Matt. > > > That clears some things up for me. I didn't realize Mongrel could > > stand alone. I am actually trying to switch over to Passenger as that > > will be my new Production env. and I want to develop in a similar > > env.. I am having some issues getting Passenger running though cause > > of some system issues on my machine. > > > What's your thoughts on running Mongrel on my dev box and Passenger in > > production? > > Mongrel used to be very popular before passenger came along. You could run > many mongrel processes on different ports, then have apache or another > webserver/load balancer route the requests to them. This made the > applications multi-threaded. > > Now a lot of people use passenger which requires less maintenance and setup, > and does pretty much the same thing quietly. > > As for your last question...I'm not an expert but I'm guessing that you > might one day run into a problem on passenger that didn't happen on mongrel > in development (or vice versa). Ideally I think you should be using the same > software on both dev and prod, but that's maybe just me. > > I think it depends a lot on your applications, if you are using complex gems > or features, then developing on different server software might cause you > problems when you deploy to production. > > These are just how I see things, others may well have different views. > > Matt Harrison --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
