3 ms·
Really glad to hear this, but IMO, one of the greatest advantages of going JRuby is gaining access to the "Java way". TorqueBox, in particular, is interesting b
by bradleyland 14y ago
Really glad to hear this, but IMO, one of the greatest advantages of going JRuby is gaining access to the "Java way". TorqueBox, in particular, is interesting because it includes many of the ad hoc add-ons that Ruby devs source from various locations. There are environments where you really want a single-source stack, rather than pulling from multiple sources.
- Tomdarkness 14y agoI agree, one of the main reasons I decided to use TorqueBox was because of this. Requires minimal configuration and I get distributed cache, clustered messaging system, HA scheduled jobs and HA services.
- PetrolMan 14y agoIn principle I agree with what you're saying but Torquebox has been something I've had to constantly work on whereas Passenger has always been, more or less, deploy and forget. I've been using Torquebox since version 2.0.1 (not that long really) but I've never really had a completely stable server. Deployment has always been somewhat of a hassle and recently the HA cache has been so broken that I have not been able to use torquebox in a cluster. In the end, I'm just happy to have another option. The more the merrier.
- bradleyland 14y agoInteresting, but not all that surprising. People are often perplexed by the fact that we continue to stick with Passenger, as opposed to jumping on the bandwagon with the latest and greatest. Passenger is the one piece of my infrastructure that I never have to touch. It also comes with a great toolchain for instrumenting (status and memory usage tools). I've been tempted by TorqueBox in the past, but never made the jump to actually build an app with it.