From: Brian Candler Date: 2010-10-09T20:30:28+09:00 Subject: Re: Camping or Merb Eduardo Tongson wrote: > We will be creating a heavy traffic site that uses Ajax, Flash video > and has heavy persistent database connectivity. Database will be most > probably PostgreSQL. > > Usage requires speed close to real time, bandwidth or latency will not > be an issue. I'm pretty sure we can accomplish all of this if we stick > to pure Ruby. But we would like to create it using a web framework and > take advantage of Swiftiply, Erubis, Mongrel etc. . > > My research shows that we will be needing Swiftiplied Mongrel and > should avoid Activerecord (use Og?). The closest frameworks in mind > are Camping and Merb. Which of these two would be the best option for > us? I strongly recommend *not* using swiftiply. It's basically unmaintained. I posted a reproducible bug a long time ago, and it was ignored. There's little point going with Merb, because that's basically unmaintained now as well - it's been merged into Rails 3. Camping is an example of a "micro framework". It uses too much metaprogramming magic for my taste. If you want a micro framework, I'd suggest Sinatra instead. Rails is obviously an example of a big framework ("macro framework"?). Whether you use that will depend on how much you want to make use of the structuring and helper methods it provides. It's a love-or-hate thing, so if you love it, use it. I would not worry about performance when using either of these: they both sit on top of Rack, and if you have specific methods which require the lowest possible latency, you can write them as Rack methods (under Rails they call this "Rails Metal") Mongrel works fine but there are newer derivatives you should look at - thin, unicorn, rainbows! With any of those you'll probably want an apache or nginx proxy sitting in front. Alternatively look at Phusion Passenger which runs directly within apache or nginx. HTH, Brian. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.