Forum: Ruby on Rails Rails on WinXP...why so 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.
0c51049fb747cd60088e4878458e05d1?d=identicon&s=25 Rick Schumeyer (Guest)
on 2007-02-09 03:54
(Received via mailing list)
I installed Instant Rails on a variety of WinXP systems.  I find that
running commands like "ruby script/generate model xyz" run *very*
slowly...anywhere from 4 seconds to 20 seconds (intolerable).  I'm not
talking about running an app via apache or fastcgi or mongrel...I'm just
trying to generate models and controllers, run rake, etc.

Some of the slower machines are around 2GHz and have only 512M of
memory.  I realize they won't be as fast as my machine with 3GHz and 2GB
memory, but I wouldn't think they would be that slow!

For what it is worth, my faster machine also runs linux, and things seem
to run much faster under linux that under WinXP.

Any ideas on making the WinXP stuff faster are appreciated.
Aafa8848c4b764f080b1b31a51eab73d?d=identicon&s=25 Phlip (Guest)
on 2007-02-09 04:12
(Received via mailing list)
Rick Schumeyer wrote:
>
> I installed Instant Rails on a variety of WinXP systems.  I find that
> running commands like "ruby script/generate model xyz" run *very*
> slowly...anywhere from 4 seconds to 20 seconds (intolerable).  I'm not
> talking about running an app via apache or fastcgi or mongrel...I'm just
> trying to generate models and controllers, run rake, etc.

I have a 600 Mhz Dell notebook running Kubuntu, and a 2.5 Ghz Windows
XP workstation. The notebook routinely blows the workstation away, for
compiles, PovRay renderings, and anything to do with Ruby.

It's the nature of the beast. The fastest SMPs in the world are
routinely Linux installations. Linux out-performs Solaris on their own
Sun hardware.

I just VNC into the notebook to get any work done, and I run the XP
desktop for goodies like TV, MS Office, etc.

--
  Phlip
  http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ZeekLand  <-- NOT a blog!!
2b891e820c238ded365d035771603f21?d=identicon&s=25 Bill Walton (Guest)
on 2007-02-09 05:08
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Rick,

Rick Schumeyer wrote:

> Any ideas on making the WinXP stuff faster are appreciated.

Best I can figure is that if enough folks quit buying it, they'll make
it
better.  I made the mistake of letting an IE 'update' go through,
thinking
I'd get a patch.  Next thing I know I've got IE 7.  Takes like 5x to
load,
then the POS crashes every time I use it to do a browser check on my
app.
To add insult to injury, I have to respond to the *^%#$ 'send error
report
dialog'.  UFB.

Best regards,
Bill
8217faf2bfdfa7daf10135d41ddd421e?d=identicon&s=25 Jeff Cohen (jeff)
on 2007-02-09 05:26
(Received via mailing list)
On Feb 8, 8:53 pm, Rick Schumeyer <rschume...@ieee.org> wrote:
> I installed Instant Rails on a variety of WinXP systems.  I find that
> running commands like "ruby script/generate model xyz" run *very*
> slowly...anywhere from 4 seconds to 20 seconds (intolerable).  I'm not
> talking about running an app via apache or fastcgi or mongrel...I'm just
> trying to generate models and controllers, run rake, etc.

It shouldn't be that slow.  I would suggest running rails without the
Instant Rails package.  I haven't tried Instant Rails in a long time,
so I don't remember what versions of Ruby and Gems that it's got.

Just do this:
1. Get the latest Ruby One-Click Installer from RubyForge, i think
it's called 1.85 RC3.  Install it with all the default options, takes
about 60 seconds.
2. Open a command prompt, type "gem install rails --include-
dependencies" (I'm assuming you're not behind a proxy that requires
authentication of some kind).
3. Install the latest MySQL "community server" edition - it's easily
available from the mysql.com downloads section.  You can uncheck the
"modify security settings" when you get to that panel in the installer
so you can leave the root password blank.

You should be off an running.  Try to generate models and rake, and
see how it compares.  It should be a lot faster.  If not, there's
something else going on with the machine.

And let me know if you need more info.

Jeff
forum.softiesonrails.com
18d3c84ca5a017fe3e96490afaea28aa?d=identicon&s=25 Richard Conroy (Guest)
on 2007-02-09 11:13
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/9/07, Jeff <cohen.jeff@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 8, 8:53 pm, Rick Schumeyer <rschume...@ieee.org> wrote:
> > I installed Instant Rails on a variety of WinXP systems.  I find that
> > running commands like "ruby script/generate model xyz" run *very*
> > slowly...anywhere from 4 seconds to 20 seconds (intolerable).  I'm not
> > talking about running an app via apache or fastcgi or mongrel...I'm just
> > trying to generate models and controllers, run rake, etc.

I find the generators to be quite slow on my windows laptop too, but
that laptop is a skanky POS anyway, over 4 & 1/2 years old, and
wasn't even great when first purchased. But still I am in your ballpark.

I stopped using Instant Rails a long time ago. Its a nice idea, but
when it broke it broke bad. And I was 'forced' to install Rails
properly,
which is what I should have been doing anyway.

I suspect that the hit is due to the loading of the Ruby interpreter
itself. I remember Java CLI tools having the same kind of issues
back in the early days.
F0dd48b0d65fb23e2a3a4d22bde87705?d=identicon&s=25 Matt Stone (Guest)
on 2007-02-09 14:19
I'm running XP with 1.8Mhz intel CPU & 1GB RAM; Rails runs much faster
than your reporting. Depending on what else your running, your machine
may be a little bit starved of RAM.

Run task manager & you will easily be able to see if your CPU or RAM is
maxing out.

- matt.
C475cffda1800fbc3f3af17bc10c220f?d=identicon&s=25 Curt Hibbs (Guest)
on 2007-02-09 19:52
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/8/07, Jeff <cohen.jeff@gmail.com> wrote:
> It shouldn't be that slow.  I would suggest running rails without the
> Instant Rails package.  I haven't tried Instant Rails in a long time,
> so I don't remember what versions of Ruby and Gems that it's got.


The One-Click Ruby Installer and and Instant Rails are my two main open
source projects, and I use the One-Click Ruby Installer as the Ruby the
ships inside of Instant Rails. So, their should not be any diffeence
between
installing the pieces by hand or using Instant Rails.

Curt
C475cffda1800fbc3f3af17bc10c220f?d=identicon&s=25 Curt Hibbs (Guest)
on 2007-02-09 19:56
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/9/07, Richard Conroy <richard.conroy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I find the generators to be quite slow on my windows laptop too, but
> that laptop is a skanky POS anyway, over 4 & 1/2 years old, and
> wasn't even great when first purchased. But still I am in your ballpark.
>
> I stopped using Instant Rails a long time ago. Its a nice idea, but
> when it broke it broke bad. And I was 'forced' to install Rails properly,
> which is what I should have been doing anyway.


I'd be interested to know what problems you had.

When I create the Instant Rails package, I do the same thing that you
would
do by hand: 1) Install the  One-Click Ruby Installer for Windows; 2) do
a
"gem install rails".

Curt
6ef8cb7cd7cd58077f0b57e4fa49a969?d=identicon&s=25 Brian Hogan (Guest)
on 2007-02-09 20:28
(Received via mailing list)
Curt's one-click-ruby actually flies on a dual core Intel or an AMD
64bit
chip. Not sure why, cos I am running 32-bit Windows.    My p4 and Xeon
machines are dog slow though.
8217faf2bfdfa7daf10135d41ddd421e?d=identicon&s=25 Jeff Cohen (jeff)
on 2007-02-10 01:37
(Received via mailing list)
On Feb 9, 12:51 pm, "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It shouldn't be that slow.  I would suggest running rails without the
> > Instant Rails package.  I haven't tried Instant Rails in a long time,
> > so I don't remember what versions of Ruby and Gems that it's got.
>
> The One-Click Ruby Installer and and Instant Rails are my two main open
> source projects, and I use the One-Click Ruby Installer as the Ruby the
> ships inside of Instant Rails. So, their should not be any diffeence between
> installing the pieces by hand or using Instant Rails.
>
> Curt

I totally agree - I just thought that maybe it would help him isolate
whatever problem he's got (and, I wasn't sure how often you update the
Instant Rails package... sorry about that.)

Jeff
softiesonrails.com
D5145c421cd25af6fa577c15219add90?d=identicon&s=25 unknown (Guest)
on 2007-02-10 01:48
(Received via mailing list)
Sorry Curt, I don't really understand why, but I found vast improvements
in
speed when I switched from Instant Rails to manually installed rails.
From
what you're saying, it sounds like there should be no difference, but
there
is.

-Nathan
18d3c84ca5a017fe3e96490afaea28aa?d=identicon&s=25 Richard Conroy (Guest)
on 2007-02-12 15:22
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/9/07, Curt Hibbs <ml.chibbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/9/07, Richard Conroy <richard.conroy@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I stopped using Instant Rails a long time ago. Its a nice idea, but
> > when it broke it broke bad. And I was 'forced' to install Rails properly,
> > which is what I should have been doing anyway.
>
>
> I'd be interested to know what problems you had.

Sorry Curt, I didn't properly document them, but trying to remember it,
it was more at the MySql end where things broke. I can't remember
precisely, I wasn't as experienced then, but some forum members
got me an install based on 1-click, gem install rails, gem install
mongrel
& gem install sqlite (after some DLL foolery) which got me up and
running.

I have been running some variants of that since (changing DB mostly).

I am not ruling out the possibility that I messed up something big time,
or that some WinXP firewall setting change broke something that Instant
Rails
needed.

> Curt

Richard.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.