Forum: Ruby on Rails css serving slow?

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.
1d7d0a1c0aabf7d358d318c3426c6bf1?d=identicon&s=25 andreim (Guest)
on 2007-06-03 19:20
(Received via mailing list)
I'm using WEBrick (in development mode) to serve a very simple page.
The browser receives from the server two things:
1) the html
2) a css file
What's strange is that it takes the server almost ten times longer to
send the css file than it takes it to send the html (11ms for the
html, 120 ms for the css). Both files are about the same size.
What's going on?
Why is serving css so much more expensive than rhtmls?
Thanks!!

--andrei

ps: i tried putting the css inside the html and the response time is
the same as for a normal html. so it's clearly not a size issue.
D0cd6b10e01bacb976b3b815a9c660bc?d=identicon&s=25 Alex Wayne (squeegy)
on 2007-06-03 19:25
andreim wrote:
> I'm using WEBrick (in development mode) to serve a very simple page.
> The browser receives from the server two things:
> 1) the html
> 2) a css file
> What's strange is that it takes the server almost ten times longer to
> send the css file than it takes it to send the html (11ms for the
> html, 120 ms for the css). Both files are about the same size.
> What's going on?
> Why is serving css so much more expensive than rhtmls?
> Thanks!!
>
> --andrei
>
> ps: i tried putting the css inside the html and the response time is
> the same as for a normal html. so it's clearly not a size issue.

For those times, I really wouldn't worry about it.  Running Webrick in
dev mode is supposed to be slow.  If you are getting the same results in
an Apache/Mogrel production environment then it might be with further
investigation.
8608f2d7f02c6d0f1c349b7b94b1cea5?d=identicon&s=25 liquidautumn (Guest)
on 2007-06-03 20:23
(Received via mailing list)
mongrel outperforms webrick by all means. just get rid of webrick.
821395fe70906c8290df7f18ac4ac6cf?d=identicon&s=25 Rick Olson (Guest)
on 2007-06-04 01:28
(Received via mailing list)
On 6/3/07, liquidautumn <denis@talentboom.com> wrote:
>
> mongrel outperforms webrick by all means. just get rid of webrick.

On another note, if webrick, mongrel, or anything else ruby based is
serving css or other static assets, you should rethink things and let
nginx/lighttpd/apache deal with it.

--
Rick Olson
http://lighthouseapp.com
http://weblog.techno-weenie.net
http://mephistoblog.com
8608f2d7f02c6d0f1c349b7b94b1cea5?d=identicon&s=25 liquidautumn (Guest)
on 2007-06-04 05:28
(Received via mailing list)
me personally developing with apache proxying to mongrel (because of
mod_xsendfile used), however I think such setup is pretty rare for
development environment
in production - no doubt.
just wondering why people keep suffering with webrick, while in recent
rails script/server starting mongrel by default.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.