tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7903632.post478797357256369227..comments2015-10-09T01:16:42.917-04:00Comments on Teflon Ted: Rails Doesn't Scale?Teflon Tedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14076074529160569225noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7903632.post-82799602838708858452008-03-14T23:32:00.000-04:002008-03-14T23:32:00.000-04:00Way too many people put stock in zed shaw's post. ...Way too many people put stock in zed shaw's post. Zed shaw is a smart guy, but he comes off as a major complainer with an unproductive attitude.<BR/><BR/>I vote for developers over hardware :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7903632.post-42011504148894059412008-03-09T18:27:00.000-04:002008-03-09T18:27:00.000-04:00Meh, I think DHH's comment is honest. Mongrel was...Meh, I think DHH's comment is honest. Mongrel was/is relatively young and probably does have leaks in systems where you encounter massive numbers of page views.<BR/><BR/>How are you gonna fix leaks like this? By installing them at places like 37signals and letting 'the big boys' find the memory leaks.<BR/><BR/>Think that's what he was trying to say.cobrabytehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11116701100883256227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7903632.post-88106915018778574292008-03-07T22:00:00.000-05:002008-03-07T22:00:00.000-05:00DHH, that you think that answer is satisfactory is...DHH, that you think that answer is satisfactory is really what's most troubling.jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15712336296519796060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7903632.post-84930261280559575632008-03-07T17:37:00.000-05:002008-03-07T17:37:00.000-05:00Pleasure, thanks for clearing that up, perception ...Pleasure, thanks for clearing that up, perception is often not the truth ;-)Graeme Rocherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12301973191113958910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7903632.post-58531239550636058132008-03-07T10:14:00.000-05:002008-03-07T10:14:00.000-05:00Just for the record, our servers never "went down ...Just for the record, our servers never "went down 6 times a day". We restarted our Mongrel processes when they reached a memory ceiling (that we set) ~6 times a day before that fix to threads got into Ruby.<BR/><BR/>Now we don't restart our Mongrels like that any more.<BR/><BR/>So a) there was never a crash issue, but a memory leak and b) that memory leak was plugged long ago.<BR/><BR/>Thanks forAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7903632.post-66737242103118414182008-03-07T04:34:00.000-05:002008-03-07T04:34:00.000-05:00Any web stack can scale if you throw enough hardwa...Any web stack can scale if you throw enough hardware at it. It is the cost of scaling that is the question and I imagine the item that most people are concerned about.<BR/><BR/>Along with scalability, there is availability. DHH's admission to Zed Shaw that their own Rails servers go down 6 times a day is just unacceptable for many.<BR/><BR/>Servers should not go down, unless there is a hardware Graeme Rocherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12301973191113958910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7903632.post-5569293255559689212008-03-06T20:32:00.000-05:002008-03-06T20:32:00.000-05:00Rails is slowly (no pun intended) getting past the...Rails is slowly (no pun intended) getting past the stage where people argue that it *cannot* scale. The kernel of truth that keeps this debate going is that, all other things being equal (designer and programmer talent, etc), a well-designed Rails will scale less than a well-designed Java or .NET app on the same hardware. (Not starting to start a flame war here; I <B>know</B> that differences Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com