[qompiler]

I have done this before using Java 7 async nio. The performance would drop like a brick when data received actually needed some sort of processing. How does this implementation hold up when you need to perform a O(n) operation on received data? Experiment with different sizes of n to see how the performance holds up.

[trailfox]

Exactly. Establishing 1 million connections is pretty easy in any language that supports async io, even scripting languages. The article is super-vague about the direction of the traffic, the nature and size of the messages and how much of the application is actually written in Ruby (vs. just being a glorified wrapper around redis and other systems written in c/c++) and the amount of work actually being done by the app. 179 requests per second is hardly something to brag about while you've completely saturated 8 cpu cores.

[hawleyal]

Ruby is a wrapper around c.

[dschiptsov]

The performance would drop like a brick when data received actually needed some sort of processing - priceless!

This reminds me another post from a guy who measured and graphed JVM performance in adding (or multiplying, can't remember) numbers. And he concluded, that, well, JVM is fast at doing dumb arithmetic in a loop.)