5 ms·

This is a very cool idea. I think it's actually more along the lines of nanite or fuzed (ironically) than mongrel1. I think Zed's approach is clever... to crea

This is a very cool idea. I think it's actually more along the lines of nanite or fuzed (ironically) than mongrel1. I think Zed's approach is clever... to create a middleware layer that can intelligently (and without adding tons of config complexity) let people build fast, complex apps that fulfill requests using a variety of backends.

stesch 16y ago
From the description ("… designed for web applications over serving files") it seems that you still need a web server as proxy in front of it for mid-sized projects; to serve static files. (Bigger projects use a server/CDN just for static files.)
- zedshaw 16y ago
  It'd be able to serve files just like normal, but at large scales smart companies use a big CDN and don't do their own file serving. The economies of scale are just not there to do it yourself. Mongrel2's advantage is its focus on apps. Combining HTTP, jssocket, and websockets seamlessly on one port means you can get the best of req/response and async operations in your GUIs.