7 ms·

Warning: RoR is slow

21 points by keiretsu 19y ago

count0 19y ago
To be fair, the current implement of Ruby (1.8x) is slow because it does not compile source code to byte code and run in vm, which will be available in next version (2.0?). Python, on other hand, already use this for a long time. So, just stick to it and wait if you like the beauty keyword "end" and dislike white space vs tab war.
keiretsu 19y ago
First of all, i don't wish to try to start a flame war. Just want to share some of my experience with RoR. RoR, to me, is the pinnacle of web programming orgasm. It's fun, it's fast, it's super productive. Hell, i never enjoyed web programming till i tried RoR. Unfortunately, RoR is slow, or specifically ActiveRecord is slow. No matter how many machines you throw at your app, there is still a noticeable page loading time lag compared to a straightforward PHP script. People hate it. Yes. They do. Users will complain and the only way you can improve the loading time drastically is if you stop using ActiveRecord. But heck, half of the joy in using RoR is with ActiveRecord. Either that or you cache page fragments. But trust me, caching page fragments is not fun. You need to keep track of which fragments to invalidate based on which model actions. Multiply that with many models and you get the same PHP messiness. So what's my point? My point is that i'm looking for a new FAST mini-framework to replace RoR. Any recommendations :)?
- Tichy 19y ago
  Groovy on out Grails, perhaps? Not sure about the performance, but at least it uses the Java VM.
- davidw 19y ago
  What have you tried doing to speed it up? Granted, RoR is no speed demon, but it seems to be "fast enough" for quite a few people. Perhaps you are doing something wrong?
- ivan 19y ago
  It would be very nice if Ruby would be taken in similar approach as PHP is. mod_ruby for apache and templating system like smarty. that's my orgasm. no frameworks no orm. oh my! :)
  - antirez 19y ago
    You can use mod_ruby + eruby. This is the setup I'm using currently to develop our next application.
    - ivan 19y ago
      I read your comment yesterday in another thread Salvatore :) and tried to find some contact on you, but without success. Yes I can but it's not widely supported by hosting providers. That's pity.
      - davidw 19y ago
        Screw 'hosting providers':-) If you're going to do anything serious, you need to be root on the machine yourself. You can get a dedicated box for under $100 a month. If that's too much initially, you can split it with a few friends - I did that for one machine, and it came to something like $20 a month, for a machine that I have root on and can do basically what I want with.
        ivan 19y ago
        David, a day without your comment is a bad day :)
        budu3 19y ago
        A dedicated box for $100 per month? Can you tell me where coz that's a very good price.
        davidw 19y ago
        I have had pretty good luck with these guys: http://layeredtech.com/dedicated-servers/specials.php http://layeredtech.com/dedicated-servers/specials.php
- mattculbreth 19y ago
  I agree with another poster--try to speed it up first. You've got a couple caching levels to try, at the page/fragment level and at the ActiveRecord level with memcached.
  - keiretsu 19y ago
    tried caching at the activerecord level with memcached. Yes, there was a speed increase but still there is a noticeable page loading time lag. It doesn't load craigslist fast.
    - sbraford 19y ago
      plz post benchmarks from all levels and i'm sure the ruby / ror community would love to help. when X page (a problem page) loads, what exact times and % of the total load time is taking place at: http server ror, broken down into: activerecord, non-AR logic, & rendering web browser (pulling down JavaScript files, CSS files, etc) (calculated for several runs, with perhaps an offpeak benchmark & onpeak benchmark to see if there's a major difference) Chances are, 80% of your slowness can be alleviated by a few small changes in one of the above areas, but each app is different of course.
  - jmcantrell 19y ago
    To be honest, it sounds like RoR or ActiveRecord is doing something wrong.
- staunch 19y ago
- gommm 19y ago
  First thing, when you use activerecord, do you know and use the include option when doing find? An example, suppose you have two models Professor, and Lessons A lesson belongs to a professor and a professor has many lessons. Now, a common mistake is to do things like @professors = Professor.find(:all) and later to have some code that does something like @professors.each do |professor| ... professor.lessons ... end What happens? well you have one request to the database and then one request for each professor. (so the number of request is equal to the number of professors + 1). If however you do Professor.find(:all, :include = "lessons") it will fetch the lessons right from the beginning and your code will only do one request.... There are a lot of small mistakes like that that beginners do.... And while rails isolate you from the database stuff, you still need to understand what it does if you want things to work well For more information on all this: http://i.nfectio.us/articles/2006/09/20/mysql-query-analyzer-rails-plugin http://i.nfectio.us/articles/2006/09/20/mysql-query-analyzer-rails-plugin it's a plugin that you can use to analyze what mysql did (it uses the explain statement for this http://railsexpress.de/blog/ http://railsexpress.de/blog/ This blog is a good read. Cheers....
- brlewis 19y ago
  I've been enjoying web programming for 13 years, most especially the past 10 using BRL, which I wrote. If you're totally in love with ORM it's not for you, though. Basically it's SQL, HTML and as little in between as possible. If you like SQL and Scheme, you'll love BRL.
- jdavid 19y ago
  Active record is also use in Hibernate/nHibernate for java and .net as an o/r (object relational) mapper. There are a number of things someone can do to speed/ or tweek the way that data is accessed. From what I have seen about the web. You want to design your functions in such a way that you are not doing anything complicated at first. This means that you should focus your API, webservice, or website around operations that perform a single DB call, and are linear in their search time, sometimes page-ation can help too. If you have an api that, for instance tries to find friends of friends, you are opening yourself up to disaster if you are going to do that in real time for a web service. You would be better off offering a service that gives you the friends of a user, pending you have the rights to see that users friends. Something else we discovered was that if you are using MySQL on a different box in the cloud, your data access times are going to be SLOW, but if you have the DB running on a machine connected through a 1Gb connection you might be alright, but if you have MySQL running on the same dedicated box, then DB calls are almost as fast a calls to memory. Especially if you set up your db connection to connect through some sort of piped call or something similar in linux. At that point your call avoids going through your network interface and you skip the TCP/IP stack, which is a huge latency boost.
- bjclark 19y ago
  What name are you submitting patches for AR under (I'm not finding any under your username here, http://dev.rubyonrails.org/search?q=keiretsu&wiki=on&changeset=on&ticket=on) http://dev.rubyonrails.org/search?q=keiretsu&wiki=on&changeset=on&ticket=on) ? I'd like to check some of them out to see what your doing. I'm assuming your not just complaining about a free open source project and that your actually doing something about it, since just complaining is pretty bad for your karma.
  - aston 19y ago
    It's no longer okay to complain? If I didn't like something, I'd prefer to complain and not use it than waste my time fixing something I find fundamentally flawed.
    - bjclark 19y ago
      No, It's not ok to just go around complaining. If you don't like it, that's fine, don't use it, but to just go around posting completely unproven slander about a completely free project is another matter completely. I love that there are some people here that seem to think they are entitled to something or that 37s or DHH owes you something. It's open source, you have 3 options: 1. Fix it and get kudos. 2. Don't fix it (because your either too dumb or too lazy) and work around it. 3. Don't use it. But coming on here and making some generalized proclamation that RoR is slow is irresponsible and unacceptable, IMO.
  - Tichy 19y ago
    While Open Source, I think Ruby on Rails is still a commercial project. Just think about the buzz it generates for 37signals, which probably converts directly to revenue. So I don't see why somebody shouldn't have the right to "complain" about it, or have an opinion about it, or decide to use something else. Maybe the 37signals don't give a damn about who is using their framework. That would also be an indicator against using it, because it would mean bad support. If they do care about who is using it, then they might also care about people's opinions about it. I think Open Source projects DO compete - just think about the submissions you request. If an open source project is not popular, nobody will submit patches or features for it, either. Then it won't grow, and eventually die.
- jamongkad 19y ago
  Why don't you try Code Igniter? Heard pretty good reviews about it. It's a framework for PHP.
  - jamongkad 19y ago
    Dunno how to edit my own comments but....Code Igniter comes with excellent documentation I might add. Initially I loved Rails but migrated to Code Igniter cuz it's lightweight and loosely coupled(You don't even need to run with a model if you choose to but it follows the MVC structure quite well). Plus it outperforms Rails in the speed department. It doesn't sport much magic compared to Rails. But that's ok if you're like me and you want to keep looking under the hood and see how stuff runs on CI. And it doesn't constrain you as much if you want to stretch out and really make it run. It actually made PHP fun to learn(if you don't mind the fugly syntax). It also supports Active Record btw.
AF 19y ago
Unless you've really got a Ruby fetish, there's just not much of a reason to use it. If you want a similar language with similar productivity, Python gives you that and speed, Unicode support at the language level, and lots of libraries. And in web frameworks alone you've got Django, Pylons, Turbogears, web.py, etc. Django has the community and 'push' that Rails does in the Ruby world, and Pylons feels a lot like Rails. So what are you waiting for? Checking them out can't hurt anything.
- jamesbritt 19y ago
  I tried Python; didn't care for it. Something just didn't click. Later on I tried Ruby, and it was a better fit for my head. There are differences in the underlying design principles of Ruby and Python, and they can make a big difference in how well you internalize the language. I also took a look at Django, and it struck me as astonishingly clunky compared to Rails and Nitro. There are issues of aesthetics at play; I can't argue that my taste is right or wrong, but it certainly matters that I use a tool that aligns with it.
  - keiretsu 19y ago
    yeah. i agree. tried python. the language is really ugly compared to ruby. django just doesn't fit into my brain like RoR does.
    - far33d 19y ago
      I think that once you get past the whitespace dependence, python is an incredibly elegant language. No strange variable prefixes, functions as primary data, readable syntax, etc etc. And, if you come from the land of C/Java/C++, it has quicker transition than ruby (IMHO)
  - jmcantrell 19y ago
    "I also took a look at Django, and it struck me as astonishingly clunky compared to Rails and Nitro" hahahahahahaha...
  - AF 19y ago
richcollins 19y ago
Hrm most of the posts here show little understanding of Rails. Rendering, not AR is behind most complaints of "slowness". If you want to speed up rendering, limit the amount of redundant Javascript that gets generated, statically generate links, don't generate SQL (eager load) and cache where needed.
- asdf333 19y ago
  No. As someone who runs a site w/ more than half a million hits a day at times, rails is butt slow. We memcache up the wazoo as well as make other optimizations. Not only is it slow but there are memory leaks too. I hope they fix alot of this. We went w/ rails b/c of the elegance, but paid for being on the bleeding edge.
  - keiretsu 19y ago
    Finally! Somebody who felt the pains of having a popular Rails site. I feel your pain my friend.
  - sbraford 19y ago
    Can you share the URL of your site? Just curious - what are your plans going forward? i.e. continue what you've been doing, rewrite in another language, or what? Not that this is your scenario, but whenever I'm in a crunch situation, it always feels like the grass is always greener. When you get to the other side... well, you know how it goes.
    - asdf333 19y ago
      Unfortunately I can't b/c of some reasons I'd be happy to share later. I know it sounds like a copout, but really, I'd be in trouble if I mentioned it now. Upper mgmt is making us rewrite it in java. (shoot self). It has more to do with what they are comfortable with long term and what the company runs and has the know-how to support. If I had to do it over again, I'd look at Python more carefully. Django was barely out when we started so we were a bit leery of it. In addition, I didn't have a great impression of Python from doing some toy programs in it. I really liked Ruby's elegance. Overall, I don't think we would've chosen Java above what we have, warts and all. Java is too verbose and RoR let us be extremely flexible and fast when it mattered. Outside of upper management intervention, we'd probably have continued down the ruby path and gambled on the fact that things would be fixed/better in a few years. I feel for twitter, but they're really doing a service for the rest of the RoR community by being the pioneer for extreme scaling issues.
jmcantrell 19y ago
Ruby and RoR, slow? This is a no-brainer. Ruby is slow as molasses and RoR is built upon Ruby. Hmmmmm....
- jamongkad 19y ago
  The implementation of JRuby should fix this concern.
sabat 19y ago
There are a lot of valuable comments here. If I had to summarize what I think is the likely problem, I would say: look into pre-fetching where it makes sense. Databases are often troublesome beasts, and you have to do more management of the data than you would like.
russ 19y ago
Something to look into: I don't know if any of you guys went to RailsConf, but one of the goals of Rails 2.0 is to improve AR through the caching of repeated queries at the AR object level.
- keiretsu 19y ago
  I've already done this. Got a minor speed bump. You have to understand that the majority of the page loading time is in the instantiation of the AR object, not from fetching the db result. At least that's my experience in my app.
dcancel 19y ago
I've moved to Django, huge performance difference. Also a simpler stack, apache + mod_python vs the nginx + mongrel or apache/lighttpd + fcgi or etc....
tx 19y ago
How can you so blindly proclaim something like this? In a world of systems programming I got used to people posting stack traces with milliseconds attached to each function call, complaining about something specific. A good example would be GNU glibc's printf() function checking system locale on every call. Have you ever done any programming before? Your claim Active Record is slow sounds almost like my computer is slow. How do you know it was ActiveRecord? How did you benchmark? Was it even RoR? Maybe you had another process spinning in an endless loop in the background eating your CPU.
- keiretsu 19y ago
  maybe because i've time-profiled it? maybe because i've calculated the time it took to instantiate a new AR object for every new db record? maybe because the results show that the AR component took the largest portion of the page loading time?
  - ricardo 19y ago
    Your original post doesn't mention any of this. I think it would help everyone understand your point a lot better if you posted a few specifics...
  - tx 19y ago
    Now we are talking. If I were you, I'd try to look at the bigger picture: do all your pages exhibit this behavior? I bet only few of them do. If ActiveRecord object creation time is your bottleneck, your rhtml on those pages must be very-very thin, because typically rhtml render works waaaay slower than active record. This tells me that you have pages with very little rhtml in them, but they (somehow) require many DB-mapped objects. Sounds like an anomaly to me. But perhaps this is just a nature of your app, in that case dump the slowest objects and don't use ActiveRecord for them. Another good suggestion was already mentioned few posts back: when creating your objects, load only those attributes that matter. Good luck, and hope you'll resolve your performance issues.

21 points by keiretsu 19y ago

To be fair, the current implement of Ruby (1.8x) is slow because it does not compile source code to byte code and run in vm, which will be available in next version (2.0?). Python, on other hand, already use this for a long time. So, just stick to it and wait if you like the beauty keyword "end" and dislike white space vs tab war.

keiretsu 19y ago

First of all, i don't wish to try to start a flame war. Just want to share some of my experience with RoR. RoR, to me, is the pinnacle of web programming orgasm. It's fun, it's fast, it's super productive. Hell, i never enjoyed web programming till i tried RoR. Unfortunately, RoR is slow, or specifically ActiveRecord is slow. No matter how many machines you throw at your app, there is still a noticeable page loading time lag compared to a straightforward PHP script. People hate it. Yes. They do. Users will complain and the only way you can improve the loading time drastically is if you stop using ActiveRecord. But heck, half of the joy in using RoR is with ActiveRecord. Either that or you cache page fragments. But trust me, caching page fragments is not fun. You need to keep track of which fragments to invalidate based on which model actions. Multiply that with many models and you get the same PHP messiness. So what's my point? My point is that i'm looking for a new FAST mini-framework to replace RoR. Any recommendations :)?

Tichy 19y ago
Groovy on out Grails, perhaps? Not sure about the performance, but at least it uses the Java VM.
davidw 19y ago
What have you tried doing to speed it up? Granted, RoR is no speed demon, but it seems to be "fast enough" for quite a few people. Perhaps you are doing something wrong?
ivan 19y ago
It would be very nice if Ruby would be taken in similar approach as PHP is. mod_ruby for apache and templating system like smarty. that's my orgasm. no frameworks no orm. oh my! :)
- antirez 19y ago
  You can use mod_ruby + eruby. This is the setup I'm using currently to develop our next application.
  - ivan 19y ago
    I read your comment yesterday in another thread Salvatore :) and tried to find some contact on you, but without success. Yes I can but it's not widely supported by hosting providers. That's pity.
    - davidw 19y ago
      Screw 'hosting providers':-) If you're going to do anything serious, you need to be root on the machine yourself. You can get a dedicated box for under $100 a month. If that's too much initially, you can split it with a few friends - I did that for one machine, and it came to something like $20 a month, for a machine that I have root on and can do basically what I want with.
      - ivan 19y ago
        David, a day without your comment is a bad day :)
      - budu3 19y ago
        A dedicated box for $100 per month? Can you tell me where coz that's a very good price.
        davidw 19y ago
        I have had pretty good luck with these guys: http://layeredtech.com/dedicated-servers/specials.php http://layeredtech.com/dedicated-servers/specials.php
mattculbreth 19y ago
I agree with another poster--try to speed it up first. You've got a couple caching levels to try, at the page/fragment level and at the ActiveRecord level with memcached.
- keiretsu 19y ago
  tried caching at the activerecord level with memcached. Yes, there was a speed increase but still there is a noticeable page loading time lag. It doesn't load craigslist fast.
  - sbraford 19y ago
    plz post benchmarks from all levels and i'm sure the ruby / ror community would love to help. when X page (a problem page) loads, what exact times and % of the total load time is taking place at: http server ror, broken down into: activerecord, non-AR logic, & rendering web browser (pulling down JavaScript files, CSS files, etc) (calculated for several runs, with perhaps an offpeak benchmark & onpeak benchmark to see if there's a major difference) Chances are, 80% of your slowness can be alleviated by a few small changes in one of the above areas, but each app is different of course.
- jmcantrell 19y ago
  To be honest, it sounds like RoR or ActiveRecord is doing something wrong.
staunch 19y ago
gommm 19y ago
First thing, when you use activerecord, do you know and use the include option when doing find? An example, suppose you have two models Professor, and Lessons A lesson belongs to a professor and a professor has many lessons. Now, a common mistake is to do things like @professors = Professor.find(:all) and later to have some code that does something like @professors.each do |professor| ... professor.lessons ... end What happens? well you have one request to the database and then one request for each professor. (so the number of request is equal to the number of professors + 1). If however you do Professor.find(:all, :include = "lessons") it will fetch the lessons right from the beginning and your code will only do one request.... There are a lot of small mistakes like that that beginners do.... And while rails isolate you from the database stuff, you still need to understand what it does if you want things to work well For more information on all this: http://i.nfectio.us/articles/2006/09/20/mysql-query-analyzer-rails-plugin http://i.nfectio.us/articles/2006/09/20/mysql-query-analyzer-rails-plugin it's a plugin that you can use to analyze what mysql did (it uses the explain statement for this http://railsexpress.de/blog/ http://railsexpress.de/blog/ This blog is a good read. Cheers....
brlewis 19y ago
I've been enjoying web programming for 13 years, most especially the past 10 using BRL, which I wrote. If you're totally in love with ORM it's not for you, though. Basically it's SQL, HTML and as little in between as possible. If you like SQL and Scheme, you'll love BRL.
jdavid 19y ago
Active record is also use in Hibernate/nHibernate for java and .net as an o/r (object relational) mapper. There are a number of things someone can do to speed/ or tweek the way that data is accessed. From what I have seen about the web. You want to design your functions in such a way that you are not doing anything complicated at first. This means that you should focus your API, webservice, or website around operations that perform a single DB call, and are linear in their search time, sometimes page-ation can help too. If you have an api that, for instance tries to find friends of friends, you are opening yourself up to disaster if you are going to do that in real time for a web service. You would be better off offering a service that gives you the friends of a user, pending you have the rights to see that users friends. Something else we discovered was that if you are using MySQL on a different box in the cloud, your data access times are going to be SLOW, but if you have the DB running on a machine connected through a 1Gb connection you might be alright, but if you have MySQL running on the same dedicated box, then DB calls are almost as fast a calls to memory. Especially if you set up your db connection to connect through some sort of piped call or something similar in linux. At that point your call avoids going through your network interface and you skip the TCP/IP stack, which is a huge latency boost.
bjclark 19y ago
What name are you submitting patches for AR under (I'm not finding any under your username here, http://dev.rubyonrails.org/search?q=keiretsu&wiki=on&changeset=on&ticket=on) http://dev.rubyonrails.org/search?q=keiretsu&wiki=on&changeset=on&ticket=on) ? I'd like to check some of them out to see what your doing. I'm assuming your not just complaining about a free open source project and that your actually doing something about it, since just complaining is pretty bad for your karma.
- aston 19y ago
  It's no longer okay to complain? If I didn't like something, I'd prefer to complain and not use it than waste my time fixing something I find fundamentally flawed.
  - bjclark 19y ago
    No, It's not ok to just go around complaining. If you don't like it, that's fine, don't use it, but to just go around posting completely unproven slander about a completely free project is another matter completely. I love that there are some people here that seem to think they are entitled to something or that 37s or DHH owes you something. It's open source, you have 3 options: 1. Fix it and get kudos. 2. Don't fix it (because your either too dumb or too lazy) and work around it. 3. Don't use it. But coming on here and making some generalized proclamation that RoR is slow is irresponsible and unacceptable, IMO.
- Tichy 19y ago
  While Open Source, I think Ruby on Rails is still a commercial project. Just think about the buzz it generates for 37signals, which probably converts directly to revenue. So I don't see why somebody shouldn't have the right to "complain" about it, or have an opinion about it, or decide to use something else. Maybe the 37signals don't give a damn about who is using their framework. That would also be an indicator against using it, because it would mean bad support. If they do care about who is using it, then they might also care about people's opinions about it. I think Open Source projects DO compete - just think about the submissions you request. If an open source project is not popular, nobody will submit patches or features for it, either. Then it won't grow, and eventually die.
jamongkad 19y ago
Why don't you try Code Igniter? Heard pretty good reviews about it. It's a framework for PHP.
- jamongkad 19y ago
  Dunno how to edit my own comments but....Code Igniter comes with excellent documentation I might add. Initially I loved Rails but migrated to Code Igniter cuz it's lightweight and loosely coupled(You don't even need to run with a model if you choose to but it follows the MVC structure quite well). Plus it outperforms Rails in the speed department. It doesn't sport much magic compared to Rails. But that's ok if you're like me and you want to keep looking under the hood and see how stuff runs on CI. And it doesn't constrain you as much if you want to stretch out and really make it run. It actually made PHP fun to learn(if you don't mind the fugly syntax). It also supports Active Record btw.

AF 19y ago

Unless you've really got a Ruby fetish, there's just not much of a reason to use it. If you want a similar language with similar productivity, Python gives you that and speed, Unicode support at the language level, and lots of libraries. And in web frameworks alone you've got Django, Pylons, Turbogears, web.py, etc. Django has the community and 'push' that Rails does in the Ruby world, and Pylons feels a lot like Rails. So what are you waiting for? Checking them out can't hurt anything.

jamesbritt 19y ago
I tried Python; didn't care for it. Something just didn't click. Later on I tried Ruby, and it was a better fit for my head. There are differences in the underlying design principles of Ruby and Python, and they can make a big difference in how well you internalize the language. I also took a look at Django, and it struck me as astonishingly clunky compared to Rails and Nitro. There are issues of aesthetics at play; I can't argue that my taste is right or wrong, but it certainly matters that I use a tool that aligns with it.
- keiretsu 19y ago
  yeah. i agree. tried python. the language is really ugly compared to ruby. django just doesn't fit into my brain like RoR does.
  - far33d 19y ago
    I think that once you get past the whitespace dependence, python is an incredibly elegant language. No strange variable prefixes, functions as primary data, readable syntax, etc etc. And, if you come from the land of C/Java/C++, it has quicker transition than ruby (IMHO)
- jmcantrell 19y ago
  "I also took a look at Django, and it struck me as astonishingly clunky compared to Rails and Nitro" hahahahahahaha...
- AF 19y ago

richcollins 19y ago

Hrm most of the posts here show little understanding of Rails. Rendering, not AR is behind most complaints of "slowness". If you want to speed up rendering, limit the amount of redundant Javascript that gets generated, statically generate links, don't generate SQL (eager load) and cache where needed.

asdf333 19y ago
No. As someone who runs a site w/ more than half a million hits a day at times, rails is butt slow. We memcache up the wazoo as well as make other optimizations. Not only is it slow but there are memory leaks too. I hope they fix alot of this. We went w/ rails b/c of the elegance, but paid for being on the bleeding edge.
- keiretsu 19y ago
  Finally! Somebody who felt the pains of having a popular Rails site. I feel your pain my friend.
- sbraford 19y ago
  Can you share the URL of your site? Just curious - what are your plans going forward? i.e. continue what you've been doing, rewrite in another language, or what? Not that this is your scenario, but whenever I'm in a crunch situation, it always feels like the grass is always greener. When you get to the other side... well, you know how it goes.
  - asdf333 19y ago
    Unfortunately I can't b/c of some reasons I'd be happy to share later. I know it sounds like a copout, but really, I'd be in trouble if I mentioned it now. Upper mgmt is making us rewrite it in java. (shoot self). It has more to do with what they are comfortable with long term and what the company runs and has the know-how to support. If I had to do it over again, I'd look at Python more carefully. Django was barely out when we started so we were a bit leery of it. In addition, I didn't have a great impression of Python from doing some toy programs in it. I really liked Ruby's elegance. Overall, I don't think we would've chosen Java above what we have, warts and all. Java is too verbose and RoR let us be extremely flexible and fast when it mattered. Outside of upper management intervention, we'd probably have continued down the ruby path and gambled on the fact that things would be fixed/better in a few years. I feel for twitter, but they're really doing a service for the rest of the RoR community by being the pioneer for extreme scaling issues.

jmcantrell 19y ago

Ruby and RoR, slow? This is a no-brainer. Ruby is slow as molasses and RoR is built upon Ruby. Hmmmmm....

jamongkad 19y ago
The implementation of JRuby should fix this concern.

sabat 19y ago

There are a lot of valuable comments here. If I had to summarize what I think is the likely problem, I would say: look into pre-fetching where it makes sense. Databases are often troublesome beasts, and you have to do more management of the data than you would like.

russ 19y ago

Something to look into: I don't know if any of you guys went to RailsConf, but one of the goals of Rails 2.0 is to improve AR through the caching of repeated queries at the AR object level.

keiretsu 19y ago
I've already done this. Got a minor speed bump. You have to understand that the majority of the page loading time is in the instantiation of the AR object, not from fetching the db result. At least that's my experience in my app.

dcancel 19y ago

I've moved to Django, huge performance difference. Also a simpler stack, apache + mod_python vs the nginx + mongrel or apache/lighttpd + fcgi or etc....

tx 19y ago

How can you so blindly proclaim something like this? In a world of systems programming I got used to people posting stack traces with milliseconds attached to each function call, complaining about something specific. A good example would be GNU glibc's printf() function checking system locale on every call. Have you ever done any programming before? Your claim Active Record is slow sounds almost like my computer is slow. How do you know it was ActiveRecord? How did you benchmark? Was it even RoR? Maybe you had another process spinning in an endless loop in the background eating your CPU.

keiretsu 19y ago
maybe because i've time-profiled it? maybe because i've calculated the time it took to instantiate a new AR object for every new db record? maybe because the results show that the AR component took the largest portion of the page loading time?
- ricardo 19y ago
  Your original post doesn't mention any of this. I think it would help everyone understand your point a lot better if you posted a few specifics...
- tx 19y ago
  Now we are talking. If I were you, I'd try to look at the bigger picture: do all your pages exhibit this behavior? I bet only few of them do. If ActiveRecord object creation time is your bottleneck, your rhtml on those pages must be very-very thin, because typically rhtml render works waaaay slower than active record. This tells me that you have pages with very little rhtml in them, but they (somehow) require many DB-mapped objects. Sounds like an anomaly to me. But perhaps this is just a nature of your app, in that case dump the slowest objects and don't use ActiveRecord for them. Another good suggestion was already mentioned few posts back: when creating your objects, load only those attributes that matter. Good luck, and hope you'll resolve your performance issues.