On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 1:25 AM, Chris Guo <guoxianghao / gmail.com> wrote:
>  "In another incident in the same article, the original Rails author
>  admits that the original Rails code required about four hundred
>  restarts a day, or six to seven restarts per thread per day. Four
>  hundred restarts a day means four-hundred chances for a database
>  transaction to fail...."

>  The question is:  Is the statement true?

The answer to that is both "yes" and "no". I didn't address it in any
of my comments because it was part of the section dealing with
"criticisms" provided in Zed's rant. They're completely out of context
and DHH *did* clarify the context in his own blog, IIRC. IMO, anyone
who relies on Zed's ghetto rant for their context is not worth
listening to. (Zed's ghetto rant is marginally worth reading on its
own, but it's not a suitable basis for others to base their arguments
on.)

>  Why should I concern this? Because my next project will be a
>  webgame(for thoese who don't know webgame, please visit www.travian.com).
>  I'm considering use Ruby on rails to develop this web app. For such
>  application, beging stable is extremedly important or the player will
>  leave with anger when data was lost, data being inconsistency or
>  something like that.

That won't happen.

>  If the statement is true, then should I turn from rails to Pylons?

Nope.

-austin
-- 
Austin Ziegler * halostatue / gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/
 * austin / halostatue.ca * http://www.halostatue.ca/feed/
 * austin / zieglers.ca