Kind of rambling response:
I don't know how much attention this has gotten, but it's occasionally good to look at places where Rails might be improved. Ok, maybe it's not Rails so much as Ruby. What posts about lift seem to say are:
- Ruby is slow - Ruby is big - Rails is single-threaded
And they conclude that they are getting orders of magnitude better performance from their fine new tool without sacrificing a bit of programmer efficiency. Following the thread further, someone suggests that Mongrel is the problem and someone else throws out the (unchallenged) assertion that Mongrel is a hack.
Performance is going to be a thorn in Rails' PR image unless 1) it doesn't matter, we're getting our apps delivered thank-you-very-much; or 2) someone addresses footprint and concurrency.
I fall into the (1) category. My sites aren't handling slashdot-like traffic and if they did, I'll betcha I could find a way to scale my Rails app out to meet the need. However (2) would make Rails an easier sell than it currently is.
Really, the "yeah, but" complaints about Rails start and stop with:
- Yeah, but it's slow - Yeah, but it's big - Yeah, but it's single-threaded ? And maybe yeah, but where's the @#$& IDE/Debugger
None of these things are even slowing my work down other than to cause a brief delay while I explain to clients why their concerns are outweighed by the benefits.
Anyhow, has anyone done much thinking about performance?
Joshua Muheim-2 wrote: