Topic: Windows 2k3 + IIS 6 + Rails + SQL Server 2000 = ?

I am doing some research for a project that might allow me to use Rails, but will require that I basically use MS for everything else (their infrastructure demands it). So given these limitations, do I have a prayer of having a successful project running Rails that can be developed and used normally? Will it be fast? What limitations/traps might I see with this setup?

If anyone has successfully deployed something like this I want to hear from you.


Re: Windows 2k3 + IIS 6 + Rails + SQL Server 2000 = ?


I definitely think this is doable. You will need to research and test it. I have some links on … _for_rails to setup an IIS server and get it to work with Rails. And Rails is also able to talk to SQL Server 2000. Good luck.

Kind regards,

Nick Snels
Compare Rails hosting

Re: Windows 2k3 + IIS 6 + Rails + SQL Server 2000 = ?

Thanks for the reply and the links. I also have a set of links that I still need to read through.

Still trying to see if anyone has tried doing this before, or if I am going to be blazing new ground? Deployment is going to be fun without Capistrano wink

Re: Windows 2k3 + IIS 6 + Rails + SQL Server 2000 = ?

It's definitely possible. In fact, thanks to all the amazing new features in Rails you'll find that the application itself will be tough for the other apps to keep up with.

A few things to keep in mind:
- debug the IIS/MSSQL stuff right away.  That's the biggest hurdle, once you get past it you're home free.
- Make sure you test 200% of what you think a Rails developer normally would.  Just pound the thing with well-thought-out, appropriate tests.  The best way to prove that Rails is a viable alternative is to make sure your app has fewer bugs than all the rest :-)
- ask questions here whenever you want.  We love to see Rails make headway in MS shops :-)

Re: Windows 2k3 + IIS 6 + Rails + SQL Server 2000 = ?

Well, the intention is to make a great app that will totally blow their socks off. I just want to do everything that I can to make sure there are no unexpected surprises halfway through. The worst thing would be some insurmountable performance hurdle 60% of the way through the project.

The good news on the tests is that I have every intention of making my team and I use the excellent testing framework that Rails has built in. The bad news is that none of us have done too much unit testing before.

I'm not afraid of asking questions if you all aren't afraid to answer them wink. I'll be leaning heavily on this community for the next little bit I think...

Re: Windows 2k3 + IIS 6 + Rails + SQL Server 2000 = ?

Well, this certainly isn't encouraging: … s/8?page=1

I wonder if I am chasing a non-existent solution. I wonder what Brian means by "ruby is slow" and how slow is slow?

Re: Windows 2k3 + IIS 6 + Rails + SQL Server 2000 = ?

I think he meant it in a particularly technical sense.  Ruby has a little catching up to do with translating method calls into a minimum number of lines of machine code.

I wouldn't let the 'slow' argument stop you.  JRuby development is coming along swiftly and will help this problem considerably (as far as I understand it).

Re: Windows 2k3 + IIS 6 + Rails + SQL Server 2000 = ?

Okay it is slow, but I think there is finally a solution to my Windows deployment woes.

The solution involves IIS6 + ISAPI_rewrite + PEN + Mongrel on the front end. Thanks to Brian Hogan for helping me out. Performance is slowish (i got around 10req/s) but it works. I was told that 64-bit hardware is likely the only way to speed this up significantly at the moment.

There also seem to be a few quirks with SQL Server and Ruby. Trying to store BLOB data in a SQL Server "Image" column doesn't seem to work like it should. It says it has a limit of 8000 characters or so... I haven't found a solution to this problem yet. So a warning for all of you who want to do file uploads to the DB it might not work properly with SQL Server. Hopefully someone knows the solution to this problem.

UPDATE: Seems I'm not the only one having the problem... SQL Server users be warned: … ff0070e7ad

Last edited by Ceres (2007-02-23 17:06:34)