4 ms·
Don't use Node if you have a lot of CRUD, because you'll still have to do a lot of stuff manually. Node's ecosystem is relatively young which means you'll have
by tzaman 14y ago
Don't use Node if you have a lot of CRUD, because you'll still have to do a lot of stuff manually. Node's ecosystem is relatively young which means you'll have to do a lot of manual labor (as opposed to something like rails and mature, production-ready gems) and stitching of components. It cat get messy rather quickly, so my advice is "the right tool for the job".
These guys nailed my point pretty good: http://www.perfectline.ee/blog/optimizing-ruby-on-rails-application-with-nodejs http://www.perfectline.ee/blog/optimizing-ruby-on-rails-appl...
- neovive 14y agoThanks for the link. I definitely agree. I've never used Node, but didn't want to dismiss any recommendations without fully researching the technology. Perhaps building the API in Node and leaving the CRUD to our existing server-side stack is an option.
- XLcommerce 14y agoThis is the route I've gone. The core CRUD part of the app is PHP, and the real-time chat and document collaboration aspect of my app is node. Works beautifully. I've had so much fun working with node for the last few days.
- tferris 14y agoI have to disagree. I understand that you can get quickly the feeling that you have to do a lot of stuff manually with node because node packages (gems in node) are more kind of atomic and not full-blown like rails. You can quickly setup a rails-like-environment with node packages. There are different web frameworks which are a refreshing take compared to rails and provide same or better functionality. ORMs like ActiveRecord for SQL DB are available as well. Deployment is easy and the overall ecosystem reflected by npm (node packet manager) is very advanced and brings some innovation into this space (compared to rvm/rbenv).
- tzaman 14y agoProve it: What is node equivalent of: "rails g resource User email:string password:string"? AFAIK there is none. At least not one that would take care of migrations, validation, security, logic and views. And if I want to use postgres? Sure, there's a npm package. But it's for queries, I still need to define models and validation manually. ....
- spyder 14y agohttp://railwayjs.com/ http://railwayjs.com/ http://towerjs.org/ http://towerjs.org/
- tzaman 14y agoNow show me a couple of sites/applications that have at least 100k users and rely solely (ok, mostly) on node.js
- dlagillespie 14y agoLinkedIn's iOS apps
- tbeseda 14y agoI don't understand what value that would offer, much less what it would prove. This was a thread about accomplishing `rails g resource` with Node. What am I missing?
- danneu 14y agoDoing what anybody else would do after looking at those two projects, I googled "railwaysjs vs towerjs" and found the question on Stack Overflow with an incredible comparison made by the creator of towerjs: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9897017/railwayjs-vs-towerjs http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9897017/railwayjs-vs-towe...
- tferris 14y agoas spyder posted there are npms providing this functionality. there are 8,000 packages for all your needs. But the point is another: the npm world is much more modular than the Rails mononblock, there is much less magic involved. You setup your own stack which is simpler than setting up Rails, rvm, gems. Rails isn't bad—it's great but getting off track or looking behind the magic can get a tedious task ...
- xyzzyb 14y agoI completely agree, and wrote an article on this while I was frustrated with a node.js project at work that was trying to throw node, backbone, require, mustache, mocha, and dynamoDB. http://rakeroutes.com/blog/the-problem-with-completely-client-side-applications/ http://rakeroutes.com/blog/the-problem-with-completely-clien...