Hi, Love Rails... I'm looking for a Production Quality Server that brings the same ease of use as Rails does to web development. I've tried TextDrive, and never got it to work. I'm sure there are good reasons why it didn't work but they are beyond me. I've contacted tech support there several times, and it seems that there are so many setups that I've never hit upon the right combination. (I take full responsiblity, it's not their fault) I've set up several Linux servers and Windows Servers, so I'm not a neophyte. But I need a solution that doesn't require me being a Savant either. I'm waiting for Railsbase aka railsapphosting.com, but that doesn't seem to be happening. I use Locomotive on the Mac and it's incredible!!! but I'm afraid this isn't a production enviroment. The production Server doesn't need to support clustering or fail-over, just an easy to setup, robust and quick server. I'm thinking about Ubuntu as the Linux Distribution which appears to be a stable easy to setup linux, and then installing LiteSpeed webserver, which appears to be faily simple to install and quick. (The Standard Version is Free) Any thoughts on this setup? Also I'm open to any other suggestions. I would love to have a locomotive type install on a MacMini ($499). Maybe I'm wrong... Is Locomotive Production Quality? and that's my answer right there? Thanks for any thoughts. John
on 2006-02-07 19:39
on 2006-02-07 19:58
On Feb 7, 2006, at 10:39 AM, John Lynch wrote: > Also I'm open to any other suggestions. I would love to have a > locomotive type install on a MacMini ($499). Maybe I'm wrong... Is > Locomotive Production Quality? and that's my answer right there? I was wondering about this as well. Is there any reason that doing Apache proxies to a bunch of lighttpd ports through Locomotive wouldn't be suitable for production, as long as the production environment was selected in locomotive? Seems like that on an xserve would be the easiest path to dedicated deployment. Toby
on 2006-02-07 21:29
A linux distribution pre-configured to run Rails apps, MySQL, postgresSQL, subversion and trac and a VPS host where this can be easily deployed and 'Just Works' is sorely needed. A VPS host that provides this service will definitely get my business. I've got a lifetime account at a host frequently suggested for Rails apps but I'm tired of my servers going down at least once for an hour each day. I hate having to make excuses on the host's behalf to my client. I may have to bite the bullet and set up my own Linux box but I'd rather spend that time working on my app.
on 2006-02-08 00:43
Until someone sets up that service you may want to consider 1) a VPS host with good support, 2) some good instructions. 1. http://rimuhosting.com/ 2. http://brainspl.at/rails_stack.html I'm a customer of rimu and the vps seems to be solid. I used to be with textdrive. Several of us have configured VPS's using Ezra's instructions. -Kelly
on 2006-02-08 03:24
On 2/8/06, John Lynch <email@example.com> wrote: > I'm waiting for Railsbase aka railsapphosting.com, but that doesn't seem > to be happening. I'm not trying to convince you to wait, but it is happening - just taking a while. There's a group of us working full time on nothing but RailsBase. Ben
on 2006-02-08 05:10
+1 on Kelly's comment.
on 2006-02-08 12:43
I've been curious about this for a little while. What kind of features might you be looking for in a PQS? Are you talking about a hosting provider, or something you can install yourself say at you company? I ask because people have been bugging me for an "application server" similar to what the Java world has. Any feature lists might motivate me to actually write the damn thing along with Mongrel. Zed A. Shaw http://www.zedshaw.com/ On Feb 7, 2006, at 1:39 PM, John Lynch wrote: > Hi, > Love Rails... > I'm looking for a Production Quality Server that brings the same > ease of > use as Rails does to web development. > <snip> > Also I'm open to any other suggestions. I would love to have a > locomotive type install on a MacMini ($499). Maybe I'm wrong... Is > Locomotive Production Quality? and that's my answer right there? <snip>
on 2006-02-08 16:32
Hi Zed, Thanks for reading. I would deploy my rails applications as either standalone boxes at client's sites to use as an intranet, or colocated on a dedicated box at a data cetner. My needs are for a fast stable easy to configure web server so for me that would include: Easy to use disto of Linux (ubuntu?) Ruby Rails Database (mysql or postgres) WebServer (rather not have apache since it seems like it's a configuration nightmare, LiteSpeed or Lighthttpd?), hopefully would support virtual hosts Email Functionality to allow my rails app to process and send email remote access via SSH I really think that would do it for me. Thanks again for thinking about this. John Zed Shaw wrote: > I've been curious about this for a little while. What kind of > features might you be looking for in a PQS? Are you talking about a > hosting provider, or something you can install yourself say at you > company? I ask because people have been bugging me for an > "application server" similar to what the Java world has. Any feature > lists might motivate me to actually write the damn thing along with > Mongrel.
on 2006-02-08 17:30
I think the feature list is quite small... script/server replacement that performs at a significant fraction of lighttpd+fcgi/scgi. -- -- Tom Mornini
on 2006-02-08 19:03
Tom Mornini wrote: > I think the feature list is quite small... > > script/server replacement that performs at a significant > fraction of lighttpd+fcgi/scgi. However, replacing script/server keeps the server in the project... hence it's not a "container" or "application server". I think the single most important contribution the java world brought to the web world was the servlet container. Having a multi-threaded server process into which I can hook and unhook my apps at will is an essential piece of code. The enterprise world will not take ruby and rails seriously until we can do that. b PS: for Zed... multi-threaded... standalone process... apps can be added/removed simply by putting them in a webapp directory or through configuration... maybe give it the ability to maintain db connection pools. I'd say the main battle, however, is getting it stable and fast while being multi-threaded.
on 2006-02-08 19:40
I'm using file_column to handle image uploads etc. I want to access the image width in the view in order to do some formatting. Is there a easy way to get to the rmagick attributes through file_column, of an image from a view? -or a controller for that matter. any insight will be appreciated
on 2006-02-08 22:27
On 08/02/06, Zed Shaw <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > I've been curious about this for a little while. What kind of > features might you be looking for in a PQS? Are you talking about a > hosting provider, or something you can install yourself say at you > company? I ask because people have been bugging me for an > "application server" similar to what the Java world has. Any feature > lists might motivate me to actually write the damn thing along with > Mongrel. What I'd personally love is a something not a million miles away from the current SCGI runner that can integrate with our existing apache install. At the moment we're using rails for a lot of the back end stuff for a busy e-commerce system with a view to rewriting the whole lot in ruby in the near future with a probable long term goal of converting the public facing side too. I'm still using v0.3 of the SCGI runner with mod_scgi with just one child running and it's handling production backend and development needs marvellously. I understand there were some issues with the internal loadbalancing when running multiple children as newer releases don't have this option. I can see that this single-child approach won't grow to the public frontend as we're essentially serialising all requests into the one application runner. The only way around this I've seen is to use lighttpd as a proxy to load balance a cluster of scgi runners (because of the ports issue with SCGIMount and mod_scgi). It strikes me a little draft to run two webservers on the same box but I'd be interested to hear other people's experiences with apache/lighttpd/scgi. I'm considering the possibility of using something like balance to sit between mod_scgi and the cluster of scgi runners but this maybe a sledgehammer / walnut solution. We don't have the luxury of being able to chuck out the existing php codebase and it's going to take a while to get the rest of the team up to speed with rails (and sometimes the 'devil on your shoulder' that is php is too tempting to resist...), so something that could unobtrusively sit in our existing apache / php setup that could handle a fair amount of traffic would be ideal. Mongrel looks very promising and I'm interested to see what it drives in the next release of the SCGI runner. I'm heartened with all your efforts in this area Zed, and only wish I could offer some help in the development. Thanks again, Paul.  - http://www.inlab.de/balance.html
on 2006-02-09 23:36
Hammed, I second Kelly's sentiment. I am using a dedicated server at LayeredTech, and setting up the server with Ezra's document was a breeze. I must say that I do have a little bit of background in the systems/db admin area, but it had been a while for me and Ezra's instructions are excellent and work out of the box! If you are having issues with availability and cannot afford the rather out of reach price of dedicated boxes on some hosts, you could try ServerBeach, LayeredTech (very good imo) or RIMU (see Ezra's note regarding memory on http:// brainspl.at ) I can't wait till Ezra's book (or at least the pdf) comes out. There is a sore need for relevant docs/guides in this particular area. -Amr
on 2006-02-10 02:14
Hey Amr, Nice name ;-) I read Ezra's instructions on setting up Debian. I think I'll give it a shot on a test RIMU account. Ditto on the book - can't wait. Thanks Hammed On 9 Feb 2006 22:36:33 -0000, Amr Malik <email@example.com>
on 2006-02-10 21:42
hehe small world! LoL! :)