is mongrel_cluster+pound good enough?

hey all,
I’m looking to deploy my rails app but havn’t decided yet on the setup. mongrel_cluster+pound looks like the most simple solution but is it enough (as in will it scale :slight_smile: if the server gets a lot of visitors? or is (pound?)+apache2+mongrel or anything else better?

thanx in advance

Pat

Hello Patrick,

I'm looking to deploy my rails app but havn't decided yet on the setup.
mongrel_cluster+pound looks like the most simple solution but is it enough
(as in will it scale :slight_smile: if the server gets a lot of visitors? or is
(pound?)+apache2+mongrel or anything else better?

It is recommended that you let a regular web server handle the static
file content. Mongrel can serve the static file content, but it is
supposed to make a more robust system.

Personnaly, I have Apache2 + mod_balance talking to Mongrel backends.
This is rock solid and have had no problems. Of course, I don't have
huge loads on the servers.

Bye !

do you know of a good tutorial do do a apache2+mod_balancing+mongrel, I found some but they were pretty complex.

thanx in advance

Pat

It is recommended that you let a regular web server handle the static
file content. Mongrel can serve the static file content, but it is
supposed to make a more robust system.

Personnaly, I have Apache2 + mod_balance talking to Mongrel backends.
This is rock solid and have had no problems. Of course, I don't have
huge loads on the servers.

do you know of a good tutorial do do a apache2+mod_balancing+mongrel, I
found some but they were pretty complex.

What do you need? Search the lists for configuration examples (this list, but more importantly the mongrel list). Other than that it's just installing apache2 and mongrel then configuring....

-philip

hi there,
here´s another configuration that i use for a rather large site with lots and lots of db reads but considerably less db writes (think cms and a fair amount of sweepstakes)
i have litespeed as the server on one machine
mysql5 on another machine
a cluster of memcached machines to cache pretty much all the db reads
i use cached model for the models and put them in memcached
i also put the sessions into memcached
this works extremely well and beat a mongrel cluster for my purposes.
even though i must say that the biggest speed improvement of the whole setup was memcached and litespeed was just icing on the cake.

a quick rundown of the stuff that needs to be installed:
http://www.danga.com/memcached/
the ruby bindings for that can be installed as a gem
cached model also
and of course litespeed

kind regards,
alexander

Nick Snels wrote: