4 ms·
Yes, phusion was a viable contender for a brief timeframe. That was 5 years ago, in 2008, until unicorn came around in 2009. I don't see how their standing in
by moe 13y ago
Yes, phusion was a viable contender for a brief timeframe. That was 5 years ago, in 2008, until unicorn came around in 2009.
I don't see how their standing in 2008 excuses them to use shady trojan horse sales tactics to push their rather mediocre product in 2013.
- FooBarWidget 13y agoUnicorn improved upon Mongrel in many ways, and it is interesting technology. We know, because we are Unicorn contributors ourselves (take a look at the AUTHORS file). However Phusion Passenger did not stay behind. Since the introduction of Unicorn, we introduced Phusion Passenger Standalone, which allows you to use Phusion Passenger in a Unicorn-like manner (e.g. you can attach it to an Nginx reverse proxy, and it uses a Unicorn-like architecture). Since then, we've even improved upon Unicorn. For example, the out-of-band garbage collection that Unicorn has? We've made it better with out-of-band work. Administration tools for querying the status of workers? passenger-status and passenger-memory-stats do it better than Unicorn. Python support? Not in Unicorn. And so on. Phusion Passenger is used to full satisfaction by many large parties, such as Motorola, UPS, Hitachi, etc. So if you can point out technical reasons why you think our product is "mediocre", please feel free to tell us, and we'll fix them.