5 ms·

The article brings up a great point wrt XSS. I'd say the new XSS stuff was responsible for 2/3 of the upgrade-errors my automated testing didn't catch, so pre-

The article brings up a great point wrt XSS. I'd say the new XSS stuff was responsible for 2/3 of the upgrade-errors my automated testing didn't catch, so pre-fixing this like they did would have had big rewards. But I was too impatient so after the upgrade I let my client feedback cover the edgecases :). I'd actually say upgrading to Ruby 1.9.2 gave me more headaches than upgrading Rails.

xal 16y ago
Cool that you managed to upgrade to 1.9.2. The encoding issues have us scared. We do have a few special purpose webapps that run 1.9.2 because of very high performance requirements.
- ludicast 16y ago
  The encoding issues bit me in a few places (especially with paperclip), and I have some hacky initializers running that monkeypatch a few libraries to behave well enough.
  - jcapote 16y ago
    I'm knee deep in encoding hell right, I'd love to hear more about how you patched it to work with 1.9.2
    - edwardog 16y ago
      You can fix most encoding problems with doing Encoding.default_internal = Encoding.default_external = "UTF-8" but as JEG states in http://blog.grayproductions.net/articles/ruby_19s_three_default_encodings http://blog.grayproductions.net/articles/ruby_19s_three_defa..., this throws warnings and may still not fix things. Encoding issues rank up there with Array.to_s pains when moving to 1.9
      - jcapote 16y ago
        Ha! Glad to know I'm not the only one hitting the Array.to_s surprise!
      - wvanbergen 16y ago
        My favorite issue in 1.9.2: "." is no longer included on the $LOAD_PATH.
- aaronblohowiak 16y ago
  Why aren't you on jruby if you have serious performance requirements? A sufficiently warmed-up jvm will outpace 1.9.2
  - xal 16y ago
    with shopify's code size jruby needs 2gb of memory per process and we found that it spends almost all the time in GC.
    - aaronblohowiak 16y ago
      which version of jruby? is 2gb per process an issue if you can run it multithreaded?

xal 16y ago

Cool that you managed to upgrade to 1.9.2. The encoding issues have us scared. We do have a few special purpose webapps that run 1.9.2 because of very high performance requirements.

ludicast 16y ago
The encoding issues bit me in a few places (especially with paperclip), and I have some hacky initializers running that monkeypatch a few libraries to behave well enough.
- jcapote 16y ago
  I'm knee deep in encoding hell right, I'd love to hear more about how you patched it to work with 1.9.2
  - edwardog 16y ago
    You can fix most encoding problems with doing Encoding.default_internal = Encoding.default_external = "UTF-8" but as JEG states in http://blog.grayproductions.net/articles/ruby_19s_three_default_encodings http://blog.grayproductions.net/articles/ruby_19s_three_defa..., this throws warnings and may still not fix things. Encoding issues rank up there with Array.to_s pains when moving to 1.9
    - jcapote 16y ago
      Ha! Glad to know I'm not the only one hitting the Array.to_s surprise!
    - wvanbergen 16y ago
      My favorite issue in 1.9.2: "." is no longer included on the $LOAD_PATH.
aaronblohowiak 16y ago
Why aren't you on jruby if you have serious performance requirements? A sufficiently warmed-up jvm will outpace 1.9.2
- xal 16y ago
  with shopify's code size jruby needs 2gb of memory per process and we found that it spends almost all the time in GC.
  - aaronblohowiak 16y ago
    which version of jruby? is 2gb per process an issue if you can run it multithreaded?