[boundlessdreamz]

When using ree, the time to load an empty rails app is half that of ruby 1.9.3 (for both 3.0.x and 3.2 rails versions) https://img.skitch.com/20111206-xt99xy9m5wsejknn4dnxng1g9m.j...

I haven't compared performance of an application in ree versus 1.9.3 but I have seen reports that 1.9.3 is slower than ree for many apps.

So rails dropping support for 1.8.7 is a bit worrying for me.

Btw ruby 1.9.2 had a huge performance regression related to loading files which made rails apps very slow. This has been fixed in 1.9.3. So you are better off using 1.9.3 if you want to use ruby 1.9.x

[justinweiss]

On a pretty large rails app, we switched to 1.9.2 about a year ago. Startup time for our app is much, much worse than it was under ree, but our average response time significantly improved -- we saw close to a 50% drop in the time spent in ruby code across nearly all requests. I wouldn't use slow startup time as a reason to avoid benchmarking your app in production mode against 1.9.x, since it could result in a huge perf boost across the whole app.

[kingnothing]

There's also a reduction in the memory footprint in switching from ree to 1.9.x. I can't seem to find the article detailing memory usage, but there's a decent difference.