In that talk that Matt mentioned they did several comparisons of REE to MRI 1.8 and Ruby 1.9.
What I took from that talk is that it's a performance patch for 1.8 and you'll get that performance improvement out of the box with 1.9. Might be worth looking in to Unnsse. I'm not using 1.9 myself (yet) but perhaps some people here could chime in? David On Jan 4, 2010, at 8:06, Matt Aimonetti <[email protected]> wrote: > REE is more efficient than standard's MRI mainly because of some > specific patches like the copy on write (COW) GC patch and a few > other ones. The Phusion guys did a good talk at Google explaining > what they did, you might want to check: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghLCtCwAKqQ > > - Matt > > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Jason King <[email protected]> > wrote: > To be honest, most of the REE hype is about performance improvements, > and you get 95% of those improvements yourself by just compiling ruby > from source instead of using a distro package. Use whichever takes > your fancy. > > On Jan 4, 2010, at 12:46 AM, Unnsse Khan wrote: > > > Does anyone know how REE < http://www.rubyenterpriseedition.com/ > > > compares with Matz Ruby? Is this the one to be using? > > > > -Unnsse > > > > -- > > SD Ruby mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > > -- > SD Ruby mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > > -- > SD Ruby mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby -- SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
