[Mongrel] Best practice Ruby on Rails on Windows configuration
luislavena at gmail.com
Wed Nov 14 12:19:22 EST 2007
On Nov 14, 2007 2:03 PM, Benjamin van Eck <bvaneck at globaltrack.com> wrote:
> I have read many articles on the net today about configuring Ruby on Rails
> on a Windows server. But there doesn't seem to a one solution for all on how
> to configure a new Ruby on Rails server. So I can use some advise with this.
> I am using a Windows 2003 server and don't get many request a day. But most
> of the request are quite heavy. The main focus is on optimizing the
> requests, instead of improving the amount of page requests.
There are many ways to respond your inquiry, and the options depends
on your "server" or business requirements.
I'll like to point that Mongrel isn't Rails. Mongrel is a webserver
that provides a easy hook to allow Rails run under the hood.
There are other web frameworks like Merb, Nitro and IOWA that uses
Mongrel, and each one has its pros and cons.
- If you're forced to IIS (Internet Information Server) it seems
latest IIS7 support FastCGI, so using libfcgi and ruby-fcgi works out
of the box
Hmn.. I shouldn't mention that since we are in the Mongrel list ;-)
If you aren't forced to use IIS, then Mongrel will be a good
alternative for this.
You mention low request per day, but heavy requests. Is there a way
you can improve and reduce the "penalty" each request faces?
Background process that parse and perform the heavy/intensive tasks?
I can confirm this, but creating a "cluster" with swiftiply  on
Windows could be achieved, but had no time to investigate it further.
If you don't plan to serve static content (huge files downloads) or
file uploads, then Mongrel is a good solution.
For development and testing (staging) you can use mongrel +
mongrel_service to have a single instance and see if the solution fits
Leaders are made, they are not born. They are made by hard effort,
which is the price which all of us must pay to achieve any goal that
More information about the Mongrel-users