[kyledrake]

The practical purpose of this is to show that Ruby is perfectly capable of scaling to fit the needs of most companies. It kills the myth that Ruby is not capable of doing serious infrastructure work.

That is EXACTLY THE POINT of this. We use Ruby for a ton of real work, and we are sick of seeing it get pummeled on unfairly for the misconception that it is a slow language and you are guaranteed to have scaling problems if you use it. Productivity and performance are not necessarily tradeoffs, with Ruby and some good planning, you can get both.

[darkarmani]

Is "179 requests per second" really an example of scaling?

[trailfox]

> unfairly for the misconception that it [Ruby] is a slow language

Ruby is a slow language, certainly considerably slower than c/c++/c#/scala/java/etc. The question is whether the performance gap is big enough in your particular use case for it to matter.

[papsosouid]

If that is the purpose, it fails miserably. I don't know of anyone who was looking to build a business on handling a million idle tcp connections. Ruby is a slow language, it is not a misconception. Having a million idle connections doesn't make a language fast.