Why Ruby on Rails?

May be…I am not the correct person to answer this, but currently Apache-2.2.3 is the standard way of serving Ruby on Rails application.Just use a cluster of mongrel application servers as a backend(for your own good actually).

Lots of commercial sites are being run like this. Its scalable, fast and works as a charm.There ain’t any point in stressing this…but for serving ASP.NET applications you must use IIS, so does that makes ASP.NET applications total crap to deploy?

I dont think so.

> May be...I am not the correct person to answer this, but currently
> Apache-2.2.3 is the standard way of serving Ruby on Rails
> application.Justuse a cluster of mongrel application servers as a
> backend(for your own good
> actually).

OK, I'll look at this. Seems a bit heavy handed to need multiple boxes
just because you're running more than one application (if I understand
you). I thought we left that requirement behind back in the 1970's.

Whoever said that is wrong. You don't need multiple boxes to run more
than one application. Rails applications usually use either FCGI or
Mongrel where you get x number of Rails processes lined up for
Apache/lighttpd/litespeed/whatever-with-a-decent-proxy-or-fcgi-implementation
lined up.

This does in general require more memory than, say, mod_php, though.

mongrel_cluster is a piece of software that essentially starts and
stops multiple instances of mongrel on different ports. You don't
need to have them on separate hardware, although you could if you
want.

On the front-end, you'll want to use something like Apache or Pound to
proxy requests to the appropriate app server(s).

You should seriously consider reading the mongrel documentation:
http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/docs/index.html

-- James

While you're at it.

http://blog.codahale.com/2006/06/19/time-for-a-grown-up-server-rails-mongrel-apache-capistrano-and-you/

-- James