On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 09:22:10AM +0900, ara.t.howard wrote:
> 
> On Aug 18, 2007, at 4:07 PM, Jos Backus wrote:
> 
>> AfaIk, Mongrel doesn't fork so this won't work. (Hey, that rhymes!)
> 
> no that's good - if it doesn't fork this might work great - if it did it 
> could not.  might want to give it whirl...

I'm not sure I understand. Are you suggesting that swiftiply_mongrel_rails run
all these Mongrels (who themselves use threads) in threads instead of forking?

If Mongrel doesn't fork, how does this give me multiple independent Mongrel
instances? If this Mongrel executes a blocking db call, won't this block the
whole process and prevent other threads from executing? I thought the idea was
to fork multiple Mongrels so that each can execute blocking calls without
affecting other requests being served by other Mongrels.

Can you elaborate please?

Cheers,
-- 
Jos Backus
jos at catnook.com