Topic: Ruby on Rails - Admin says no

I need some info for an admin who is unwilling to support Ruby on Rails because it "uses a container that has to be bounced which can cause problems with the server."

The admin says he has been reading and claims Rails is causing problems for many companies.

I need to convince this admin that Rails is worth supporting.

I also need some info to convince this admin Rails is not more of a security risk than say hosting PHP applications.

Re: Ruby on Rails - Admin says no

What are his sources for the issues with rails?

All languages, frameworks, and platforms have faults and issues. Rails trades some shortcomings for others just like PHP does.

Re: Ruby on Rails - Admin says no

I use Mongrel clusters and FastCGI and haven't had to 'bounce' either one. Although I have had occasionally deployment issues with FastCGI, Mongrel is rock-solid. That said, my FastCGI application has now been running continously since September without restart.

Are there any specific issues the admin has?

Toby Hede
===================================================
FiniteStateMachine - Software Development for Social Networks
===================================================

Re: Ruby on Rails - Admin says no

Tell him to look through 732 pages of php holes:
http://search.securityfocus.com/swsearc … =0&y=0

Then have him look at the 2 pages of rails issues:
http://search.securityfocus.com/swsearc … =0&y=0

I'm a sysadmin and I'm pushing the web team at work to move away from php as fast as possible.  But I'm on the rails forum, so I'm biased.

As far as "supporting" it from a sys admin level he really won't be if you roll your own and not use the ruby on the OS.  This is what we do, anyway.

Jason

Last edited by _jason (2008-02-07 19:57:48)