# Web brick is it that bad

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/web-brick-is-it-that-bad/91265>\
**Category:** Rails\
**Created:** [April 6, 2007, 4:01am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/web-brick-is-it-that-bad/91265 "2007-04-06T04:01:14Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Camo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/ce7236/32.png) [@Camo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Camo)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2007, 4:01am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/web-brick-is-it-that-bad/91265/1 "2007-04-06T04:01:14Z")

</div>

Hey guys, I’ve been a .net developer for a long while and started  
getting in to rails lately,

I was just wondering thou, is there any reason to use say apache or  
lighttpd over web brick for development. From playing around with it,  
it seems to be fine, is there some limitations besides maybe  
performance?

Cheers,  
Camo

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Camo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/ce7236/32.png) [@Camo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Camo)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2007, 4:05am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/web-brick-is-it-that-bad/91265/2 "2007-04-06T04:05:14Z")

</div>

Camo [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote:

> I was just wondering thou, is there any reason to use say apache or  
> lighttpd over web brick for development. From playing around with it,  
> it seems to be fine, is there some limitations besides maybe  
> performance?

I use it for the point of development where I’m not too terribly  
concerned  
about my environment; eg when I’m making a few small changes then want  
to  
have “script/server” running so I can quickly refresh to see my changes.  
And  
I haven’t seen any problems either!

When I’m at the point of showing my work to a client, beta-testing it,  
or  
want to see it running in a “real” staging environment, I always go with  
apache2.

Cheers,  
Tyler

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Camo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/ce7236/32.png) [@Camo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Camo)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2007, 4:47am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/web-brick-is-it-that-bad/91265/3 "2007-04-06T04:47:16Z")

</div>

I concur. Webrick is fine for development, and probably for testing too.  
I  
guess the reason people use Apache etc, is that they are more  
comfortable  
having an environment similar to their production environment.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Camo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/ce7236/32.png) [@Camo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Camo)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2007, 5:44am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/web-brick-is-it-that-bad/91265/4 "2007-04-06T05:44:19Z")

</div>

Cheers, I was under the same impression, for staging and production  
you need something more scalable I agree.

I just wasn’t to sure if web brick was suitable for development, if it  
had any problems, thanks for clearing that up