Forum: Ruby on Rails FCGI processes versus Mongrel servers

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Hasham (Guest)
on 2007-07-03 08:20
(Received via mailing list)
I can bet that running 10 FCGI processes is much lighter on resources
than running 10 instances of mongrels. what do you think? then why is
running mongrels is more preferable these days? Is there any work
going on to make rails thread safe?
Robert O. (Guest)
on 2007-07-04 10:35
(Received via mailing list)
We have had far better performance and overall system stability using
Mongrels over FastCGI processes.  If you used something like fcgid or
one of
the newer fastcgi implementations its better over mod_fastcgi, but we
still
have found, in several different big apps, that Mongrel is usually
better
than FastCGI.

Robert

On 7/2/07, Hasham <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> I can bet that running 10 FCGI processes is much lighter on resources
> than running 10 instances of mongrels. what do you think? then why is
> running mongrels is more preferable these days? Is there any work
> going on to make rails thread safe?
>
>


--
Robert W. Oliver II
CEO of OCS Solutions, Inc., Web Hosting and Development
http://www.ocssolutions.com/
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.