3 ms·
While it's certainly true, at least in my experience, that Passenger is both easier to set up and demands fewer system resources than a Mongrel cluster, there's
by ionfish 17y ago
While it's certainly true, at least in my experience, that Passenger is both easier to set up and demands fewer system resources than a Mongrel cluster, there's a third vital factor: Passenger works just fine with Ruby 1.9, whereas Mongrel doesn't. This, ultimately, was the reason I switched.
Coincidentally, I ran up an article on shifting my server to Ruby 1.9 earlier today. It might be of interest to anyone considering it.
http://extralogical.net/2009/07/ruby-one-niner/ http://extralogical.net/2009/07/ruby-one-niner/
- Andys 17y agoIronically mongrel & dependencies only require a handful of lines of patching to work on 1.9 - the fact that no one has bothered for many months now shows just how unpopular mongrel has become.
- sho 17y agoIsn't it being maintained by Evan Weaver (twitter) these days? He made some ridiculous stand against 1.9 ages ago, maybe he refuses to update the gem based on that. No other good explanation I can think of, the changes are trivial.