> If the app is slow, how "slow" is slow? 2s a page or 10s for a page? > > Now you have to look at what is slow. Is it page render? is it the > database?
Well, it depends, sometimes rendering takes up 71% of the time, sometimes just about 40%. The thing is, in the logs I see this a lot: Completed in 2.24305 (0 reqs/sec) | Rendering: 0.17941 (7%) | DB: 0.15140 (6%) I don't get that. Especially not because in the same request, I see this, among other things: Rendered shared/_something (0.21424) Now, the 2.2 seconds is way too long and that luckily doesn't happen too often. But why doesn't the request summary add up? > I have a feeling that your site does not get crazy amount of traffic > and therefore using nginx or Apache or passenger or thin is not going > to make any difference. UNLESS your server is a virtual server with > only 256mb ram and you are swapping because you did not move the max > passenger threads down from the default 6.. It's a big website and I'm not saying it's not optimized, because that's really where the problem is in this specific situation, but I also experience high loading times on very small private projects. I'll go look in the logs there as well. > > my 2cents... > > PS if this app is 3+ years old you should at a minimum upgrade rails > and make use of new rails features... 2006 is Rails 1.1.x ... There have been upgrades, we're on 2.1.1 now. Thank you. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
