Re: EventMachine with thread pool and thread spawn

[Eric Wong <normalperson-rMlxZR9MS24@public.gmane.org>]

"Lin Jen-Shin (godfat)" <godfat-hOE/xeEBYYIdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Eric Wong <normalperson-rMlxZR9MS24@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > Anyways, it's still infuriating to me that Heroku cannot do full
> > buffering and still claims to "support" unicorn.
> 
> They do provide a way to customize the deployment, so that we could
> build an Nginx while deploying and run it for each unicorn process though.
> They do not officially support this, but it could work... things might break
> easily if they changed something though.
> 
> The reason why they don't fully buffer is because of latency concern
> as far as I know. But I feel in most of the web apps, we don't really do
> realtime stuffs.

(part 2, sorry got distracted during my first reply)

Latency for slow streaming?  Sure, but unicorn is completely wrong for slow
streaming in any direction.

For fast requests/responses, any latency introduced by nginx is dwarfed
by network latency to the client.

> And the most frustrating thing to me is that my co-workers don't really
> trust me. They still prefer unicorn because Heroku recommends it
> officially even when I showed benchmarks and some people at Heroku
> did admit it could be an issue.

Heh, I don't get it, either.  Especially given _my_ disapproval of
the default Heroku setup with unicorn.  Oh well, I get the feeling
some unicorn users only use it because of buzz from a handful of
blogs, not because they read the documentation and understand it.
That probably goes for most tech :<
_______________________________________________
Rainbows! mailing list - rainbows-talk-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rainbows-talk
Do not quote signatures (like this one) or top post when replying