Thanks for this discussion. I also had (and was about to ask) similar question(s). I've already tried to get/use Latest+Stable ruby compiled & used on other RHEL based repo, but something conflicted, as i'm new to these, so beyond my understanding what was it at this point. But need to look-into/try-out what you've discussed/suggested here, may be useful for my case, (solutions which use very low memory footprint, and large vswap or swap or database use is/are ok). -- Bright Star. Received from Craig White, on 2013-02-04 9:52 PM: > > On Feb 4, 2013, at 1:46 PM, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> Phil Dobbin wrote: >>> >>> The doesn't scale well argument hasn't been the >>> case for at least a few years now. Twitter is just >>> one example. Some of the busiest sites on teh >>> Interwebs are still using it. >> >> Um, according to wikipedia, twitter went to scala, >> and uses ror for the user interface. > ---- What's wrong with that. They became the next > biggest thing - so big that they had to make scaling > adjustments. Successful sites do that. ---- >>> >>> There are also projects, for example, like Puppet >>> that are written in Ruby that are used by a lot of >>> fairly large organisations. >>> >>> It may be worth your while reappraising Ruby. >> >> I'm an admin these days, and don't get to argue this. >> However, when it's packageable, and pushed out that >> way, so that someone can update a ton of machines, >> and not hand-craft it, *AND* subreleases don't break >> working code, I'll reconsider my attitude. >> >> And as I think I said, I find the RoR website rather >> obnoxious in its refusal to pay any attention to the >> biggest market in North America, RH and RH-derived >> repos. > ---- It's packaged and pushed out in a way that someone > can update a ton of machines. > > Trust me, I'm a DevOPS person… that's my job. > > Even if Red Hat actually tried to keep up with ruby > releases, I wouldn't use them and haven't used them for > quite some time. The Enterprise Ruby versions were far > superior to any version ever packaged by RH (garbage > collection, performance, etc.). The reality is that if > you are supporting Ruby/Ruby on Rails apps in any > meaningful way, RH's ruby packaging is meaningless. > > Craig > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS > mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
