# Pound / Mongrel vs Apache / FastCGI etc

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/pound-mongrel-vs-apache-fastcgi-etc/108119>\
**Category:** Rails\
**Created:** [June 29, 2007, 5:37am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/pound-mongrel-vs-apache-fastcgi-etc/108119 "2007-06-29T05:37:48Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jeannibee](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jeannibee](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeannibee)\
**Post date:** [June 29, 2007, 5:37am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/pound-mongrel-vs-apache-fastcgi-etc/108119/1 "2007-06-29T05:37:48Z")

</div>

Hi

Not really asking for a debate, per say, but more of a link ot a page  
outlining the differences in methodologies for deploying production  
quality (high volume) Rails sites.

To me Apache has the win for handling my static content from the load  
point of view but loses a few points with fastCGI.

The Pound / Mongrel solution seems more ‘Rails-esque’ and also able to  
handle large load.

Thanks.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jeannibee](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jeannibee](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeannibee)\
**Post date:** [June 29, 2007, 5:29pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/pound-mongrel-vs-apache-fastcgi-etc/108119/2 "2007-06-29T17:29:45Z")

</div>

On 29 Jun 2007, at 05:37, Jean N. wrote:

> Not really asking for a debate, per say, but more of a link ot a page  
> outlining the differences in methodologies for deploying production  
> quality (high volume) Rails sites.
> 
> To me Apache has the win for handling my static content from the load  
> point of view but loses a few points with fastCGI.
> 
> The Pound / Mongrel solution seems more ‘Rails-esque’ and also able to  
> handle large load.

I wrote up a post on installing Apache + Pound + mongrel\_cluster at  
[http://forums.rimuhosting.com/forums/showthread.php?t=389](http://forums.rimuhosting.com/forums/showthread.php?t=389)  
My setup places Apache BEFORE Pound, so I’m only using pound for  
balancing my Rails apps, the rest (PHP, plesk, stats) is handled by  
Apache directly.

Been very happy with the performance and ease of configuration.

Best regards

Peter De Berdt

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jeannibee](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jeannibee](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeannibee)\
**Post date:** [June 30, 2007, 4:37am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/pound-mongrel-vs-apache-fastcgi-etc/108119/3 "2007-06-30T04:37:17Z")

</div>

Peter De Berdt wrote:

> I wrote up a post on installing Apache + Pound + mongrel\_cluster at  
> [http://forums.rimuhosting.com/forums/showthread.php?t=389](http://forums.rimuhosting.com/forums/showthread.php?t=389)  
> My setup places Apache BEFORE Pound, so I’m only using pound for  
> balancing my Rails apps, the rest (PHP, plesk, stats) is handled by  
> Apache directly.
> 
> Been very happy with the performance and ease of configuration.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Peter De Berdt

Excellent article thanks!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jeannibee](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jeannibee](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeannibee)\
**Post date:** [July 2, 2007, 2:54pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/pound-mongrel-vs-apache-fastcgi-etc/108119/4 "2007-07-02T14:54:47Z")

</div>

Do look into nginx + mongrel. I’ve been messing around with it recently  
and  
it’s really quite the system, and is the server that many Rails  
developers  
are turning to.

A couple of links regarding nginx and Rails

[http://brainspl.at/articles/2006/08/23/nginx-my-new-favorite-front-end-for-mongrel-cluster](http://brainspl.at/articles/2006/08/23/nginx-my-new-favorite-front-end-for-mongrel-cluster)

[http://blog.kovyrin.net/2006/08/22/high-performance-rails-nginx-lighttpd-mongrel/](http://blog.kovyrin.net/2006/08/22/high-performance-rails-nginx-lighttpd-mongrel/)

[http://errtheblog.com/post/3908](http://errtheblog.com/post/3908)

The short: nginx absolutely screams past Apache in benchmarks, is MUCH  
easier to configure and nearly as feature complete as Apache, with it’s  
own  
build in proxy balancing.

Heck, I’ve gotten nginx to proxy back to an Apache process for SVN  
access in  
very little time (nginx’s WebDAV plugin isn’t ready for SVN yet, but  
it’s  
getting there). Give it a try, it’s quite impressive.

Jason