# Ruby 1.9 webservers?

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-9-webservers/144819>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [August 2, 2008, 5:20pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-9-webservers/144819 "2008-08-02T17:20:22Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dgm](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@dgm](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/dgm)\
**Post date:** [August 2, 2008, 5:20pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-9-webservers/144819/1 "2008-08-02T17:20:22Z")

</div>

The combination I’m trying to make work is Ruby1.9 + Ramaze + Rack? + ?

I’m told there are some issues with Rack, so that might be the problem.  
Mongrel won’t install at all (it wants fastthread).

Ebb is the strangest – it keeps Ruby at 100% CPU, but seems to work  
(Ramaze  
responds as I’d expect it to.) Thin and Webrick keep Ruby at 3-5% CPU,  
but  
also seem to work. Keep in mind this is with pretty much the “Hello  
World”  
Ramaze app, and without any requests – whatever it is seems to be  
entirely  
external to the app.

I’m running 1.9.0 (2007-12-25, rev 14709) – could that be the issue? Is  
there  
some “hello world” Rack app I could use to make sure it’s not a Ramaze  
issue?  
And is there some combination of framework / webserver / 1.9 version  
which  
works?

Yes, I know it wouldn’t be production ready, and would very likely be  
entirely  
unstable. This is just an experiment, though; it will never have more  
than  
ten users.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dgm](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@dgm](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/dgm)\
**Post date:** [August 2, 2008, 5:58pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-9-webservers/144819/2 "2008-08-02T17:58:24Z")

</div>

On Saturday 02 August 2008 10:18:38 David M. wrote:

> Ebb is the strangest – it keeps Ruby at 100% CPU, but seems to work (Ramaze  
> responds as I’d expect it to.) Thin and Webrick keep Ruby at 3-5% CPU, but  
> also seem to work.

I have to amend this – the 3-5% was apparently caused by Ramaze’s  
somewhat  
zealous reloading scheme.

However, even with this off, Ebb is still at 100%. I suppose I should  
file a  
bug against Ebb, then…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dgm](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@dgm](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/dgm)\
**Post date:** [August 2, 2008, 6:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-9-webservers/144819/3 "2008-08-02T18:30:35Z")

</div>

David M. wrote:

> a bug against Ebb, then…  
> i think something in your environment is broken.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dgm](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@dgm](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/dgm)\
**Post date:** [August 3, 2008, 1:34am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-9-webservers/144819/4 "2008-08-03T01:34:01Z")

</div>

matu wrote:

> David M. wrote:
> 
> > a bug against Ebb, then…  
> > i think something in your environment is broken.

Considering that Ruby 1.9.0-0 is very much a beta, if not alpha, quality  
release, I would say a bug is not remotely out of the question.  
However, there are newer versions in the 1.9.0 line. I would suggest  
starting over with ruby 1.9.0-3 and see how things go. If you still  
have issues, then you might consider filing a bug report, but I don’t  
really know if I would file against ebb or ruby.

By the way, you probably won’t be able to find a package for 1.9.0-3.  
You’ll probably have to compile it from source.

James