Can deploying Rails in production be easier than this?

Fellow Rail users and developers,

Right now the easiest way to run Rails is in combination with Mongrel.
However, it may not be a good idea to expose Mongrel directly to the
outside world in a high-load production environment. In-addition,
Mongrel_cluster + proxy + load balancer have to be used even for a
single server deployment making the unified setup more complicated than
needs be.

Today, we released LiteSpeed Web Server 2.2 with major enhancement on
Rails configuration. With 2.2 release, you only need to tell LSWS the
Rail application's root directory and URL bind paths. LSWS will take
care of everything else. No more manual configuring of FCGI, 404
handler/rewrite rules, proxy, load balancing, and etc.

Our new wiki for Rails Easy configuration:
http://www.litespeedtech.com/support/wiki/doku.php?id=litespeed_wiki:ruby_rails_easy

We believe we have created the easiest way to deploy Rails in a
production level environment with a track-record for scalability and
reliability.

Best Regards,
George Wang
http://www.litespeedtech.com/

This is awesome, George. Great work.

jeremy

George,

I’m not very well versed in Litespeed but from what I read this would make my life easier at deploying my apps. Since I’m on a small budget will this new development work in the free version? What will I be really missing from the paid version?

Thanks in advance,

Adrian Madrid

Very nice, I saw LiteSpeed a little while ago as an alternative and
have been really impressed with it so far. We're definitely planning
on using it in production when we launch.

Adrian,

Yes, the new feature is available in the free version. The main
difference between the free and paid version is the scalability, free
version can take 300 concurrent connections, paid version is unlimited.
Paid version is faster than free version.

More details is available at
Best Regards,
George
development work in the Adrian Madrid wrote:

This is great news for the Rails community. I know I have been itching
to have a more streamlined rails install and run-time procedure.
Frankly, the current methods just add layers and layers of latency.

Posted on Digg.

http://digg.com/software/LiteSpeed_Best_platform_to_host_Ruby_on_Rails

Digg if you to support litespeed in its rubyrails efforts.

George,

Thanks for the info. I’m testing it right now. One suggestion: get a designer for the admin interface. It looks so 1994! :wink:

Thanks again,

Adrian Madrid

Thanks for the suggestion, we plan to renovate the admin interface for
the 3.0 release. :slight_smile:

Adrian Madrid wrote:

Good work George, I actually really like litespeed.

One thing you might want to look at is a set of instructions on how this
integrates with capistrano. That's currently the big motivator for lots
of deployments today, and it's not too clear how your control panel
integrates with command line operations from capistrano.

Fellow Rail users and developers,

Right now the easiest way to run Rails is in combination with Mongrel.
However, it may not be a good idea to expose Mongrel directly to the

outside world in a high-load production environment. In-addition,
Mongrel_cluster + proxy + load balancer have to be used even for a
single server deployment making the unified setup more complicated than

needs be.

Today, we released LiteSpeed Web Server 2.2 with major enhancement on
Rails configuration. With 2.2 release, you only need to tell LSWS the
Rail application’s root directory and URL bind paths. LSWS will take

care of everything else. No more manual configuring of FCGI, 404
handler/rewrite rules, proxy, load balancing, and etc.

Our new wiki for Rails Easy configuration:

http://www.litespeedtech.com/support/wiki/doku.php?id=litespeed_wiki:ruby_rails_easy

We believe we have created the easiest way to deploy Rails in a
production level environment with a track-record for scalability and

reliability.

Good work George, I actually really like litespeed.

One thing you might want to look at is a set of instructions on how this
integrates with capistrano. That’s currently the big motivator for lots

of deployments today, and it’s not too clear how your control panel
integrates with command line operations from capistrano.


Zed A. Shaw
http://www.zedshaw.com/

http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/
http://www.lingr.com/room/3yXhqKbfPy8 – Come get help.

Please consider win32 release seriously…

-daya

Hi Zed,

Good work George, I actually really like litespeed.
  

Thanks!

One thing you might want to look at is a set of instructions on how this
integrates with capistrano. That's currently the big motivator for lots
of deployments today, and it's not too clear how your control panel
integrates with command line operations from capistrano.
  

Absolutely, that's the next thing on our to-do list. We will have our
LiteSpeed Capistrano integration guide line on our Wiki soon. It should
be very easy actually.

Please stay tuned. :slight_smile:

George

Hi Daya,

Please consider win32 release seriously…
Due to the dramatic differences between Windows and Unix(s), porting
the whole LSWS product is a not a easy task, however, a dedicated Rails
application server is possible, if the demand is high enough. :slight_smile:

Thanks,

George

George Wang wrote:

Hi Daya,

    Please consider win32 release seriously..

Due to the dramatic differences between Windows and Unix(s), porting the
whole LSWS product is a not a easy task, however, a dedicated Rails
application server is possible, if the demand is high enough. :slight_smile:

Would a VMWare image be a good way of giving Windows users something to work with? It could contain a configured and running LiteSpeed/Rails/DB setup on Linux or BSD.

regards

   Justin

George Wang <gwang@...> writes:

Absolutely, that's the next thing on our to-do list. We will have our
LiteSpeed Capistrano integration guide line on our Wiki soon. It should
be very easy actually.

Please stay tuned.

George:

I'm definitely interested in trying your setup. Any estimate on
when your Capistrano integration guide will be online?

Are there any issues running LiteSpeed along side Apache,
specifically 1.3. I would like to do the majority of my web
development in RoR - but I need to continue offering cPanel
to my customers which is only Apache1.3 compatible.

I am currently using mongrel + apache 2.2 with mod_proxy_balancer.

The LSAPI stuff got me a little confused, is it that if i use LSAPI of Litespeed and remove mongrel, it will be faster? Or it is meant to be in conjunction with mongrel?

I was just wondering, what is the best configuration with Litespeed?

Litspeed is independent of Mongrel if you use their LSAPI setup. If you
use their proxy config then you need to use Mongrel.

Due to the dramatic differences between Windows and Unix(s), porting the
whole LSWS product is a not a easy task, however, a dedicated Rails
application server is possible, if the demand is high enough. :-)
Would a VMWare image be a good way of giving Windows users something to work with? It could contain a configured and running LiteSpeed/Rails/DB setup on Linux or BSD.

Justin,

Thanks! That’s a pretty good idea, and pretty easy to do. It is good
solution for someone familiar with Linux to try it on a windows machine.

George

Hi Justin Pease,

I'm definitely interested in trying your setup. Any estimate on
when your Capistrano integration guide will be online?
  

Maybe in next week. :slight_smile:

Are there any issues running LiteSpeed along side Apache,
specifically 1.3. I would like to do the majority of my web
development in RoR - but I need to continue offering cPanel
to my customers which is only Apache1.3 compatible.
  

There should not be any problem to run LiteSpeed along side Apache.
However, LiteSpeed is engineered to be Apache interchangeable by using
Apache's httpd.conf directly.
We have users who just replaced Apache with LiteSpeed while managing
hosting account in cPanel. :slight_smile:

Best Regards,
George

LiteSpeed can be used together with Mongrel or Ruby LSAPI, LSAPI will
give a little bit better performance according third party benchmarks,
but the difference is not that big.

Rails easy configuration is available with LSAPI. Best Regards,
George
hemant wrote:

George Wang wrote:

Fellow Rail users and developers,

8x.....snip...

Our new wiki for Rails Easy configuration:
http://www.litespeedtech.com/support/wiki/doku.php?id=litespeed_wiki:ruby_rails_easy

We believe we have created the easiest way to deploy Rails in a
production level environment with a track-record for scalability and
reliability.

Best Regards,
George Wang
http://www.litespeedtech.com/

I believe you're absolutely right. :slight_smile: After reading your post, it took
me about 30 minutes to get this whole thing installed and my rForum
install running on litespeed and all I did was just followed the wiki
link that was posted.

I am truly impressed. Now only if I could get that dang plugin to stop
raping my rForum's name-space I'd be a happy camper. Alas, not all
things are meant to deliver on their promises (unlike litespeed I
suppose)

Finally.. something which actually works as advertised! WHAT A CONCEPT!

kudos!

-A