4 ms·

So many familiar faces in this thread. :) With Ruby::Concurrent, I found similar weird-isms until I wrapped in `Rails.application.executor`. Rails has its quir

by joshmn 4y ago

So many familiar faces in this thread. :) With Ruby::Concurrent, I found similar weird-isms until I wrapped in `Rails.application.executor`. Rails has its quirks and purists can be put off by all the "extra work" that needs to happen for things to play nicely together. To that I say: Rails gives me superpowers and I need to abuse them appropriately.

jrochkind1 4y ago
Totally -- I've been trying to do multi-threaded concurrency like this since before Rails actually had `Rails.application.executor` -- it was possible, there were some gotchas. It is very helpful to now have API available at that level of abstraction. It can still get weird sometimes. There are still some gotchas. Usually about ActiveRecord. With what we know now from seeing how it all works out, if we were able to do it over again greenfield, I think it's pretty clear that sequel's concurrency/pooling model is preferable to ActiveRecord's. Although I'm sure it would have it's own downsides I'd run into if I used it more and at scale.