# Mongrels slower than Webrick?

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/mongrels-slower-than-webrick/91311>\
**Category:** Rails\
**Created:** [April 6, 2007, 5:18pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/mongrels-slower-than-webrick/91311 "2007-04-06T17:18:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joram](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/e8c25b/32.png) [@Joram](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Joram)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2007, 5:18pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/mongrels-slower-than-webrick/91311/1 "2007-04-06T17:18:41Z")

</div>

Hi list,

I’ve just run my testscript 100 times to see if mongrel really was  
that fast as the internet suggested.  
Both webrick as mongrel are run in production mode, with the same  
tests.  
Both are run as a single process and default logging.

But in every test mongrel is a bit slower than WebRick,  
for example :

Webrick: AdminController#index 101(count) 0.0457 (Avg) 0.5519  
(Std)  
Mongrel: AdminController#index 101(count) 0.0536 (Avg) 0.6123  
(Std)

It’s not much difference, but I suspected Mongrel to be superior to  
Webrick.  
I’m running both tests on Ubuntu 7.04. Mongrel was installed by gem  
install mongrel.

Have I done something wrong?

Joram