Agreed, I would have also loved to see the results of using 1.9.3/2.0 with Puma, as well as memory consumption differences and a bit more information about the benchmarked app :) On May 23, 2013 3:33 AM, "bradleyland" <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's always great to have more points of data to consider when comparing > app servers. One little thing though, there are no legends for the graphs, > so it's unclear which is which until you start reading after the graph > > > On Wednesday, May 22, 2013 12:06:51 PM UTC-4, Ylan Segal wrote: >> >> Hi Clark, >> >> I did some more playing around with unicorn and puma. This time I used >> jRuby for puma and it's performance was really sweet. I tested locally with >> a test application, so YMMV: >> >> http://ylan.segal-family.com/**blog/2013/05/20/unicorn-vs-**puma-redux/<http://ylan.segal-family.com/blog/2013/05/20/unicorn-vs-puma-redux/> >> >> -- > -- > SD Ruby mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "SD Ruby" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- -- SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SD Ruby" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
