I come from a traditional programming background by which I mean C, Java, C#, C++ and a little python and VBA.
Now I'm trying to create a small CRUD application for the purpose of taking a form and turning it into an online form and database for later querying.
My initial thinking seems to lead me to Ruby on Rails given the fact that there is a lot of good stuff about it on the internet and my greatest strength is that I pick up languages fairly quickly so the fact that I have never seen Ruby code until 10 mins ago is no big deal. Now having said that I'm looking for cheap infrastructure to a) host an svn repository and a web server to allow me to develop and learn what I need and eventually deploy.
In short;
1) Where can I go for this cheap infastracture for the purposes of learning and eventual deployment?
2) Where should I go for infrastructure to host and SVN repository? (I haven't coded in a while, but will be needing this for a multitude of things and am not in a place to run this off a home desktop/server)
3) If you don't agree with my Ruby on Rails conclusion, what would you recommend and why?
Is SVN mandatory? If you don't mind trying something like git, you can get a small application up and running using heroku in no time. And, for free.
There might be a few stumbling blocks at first–getting your local development environment all set up–but you'll be able to get going fairly quickly.
unfuddle has great SVN and GIT hosting for free, you actually get private repos with SSH.
If you haven't given GIT a try, I would. SVN was the first source control I used, but after messing with git a little I immediately switched, it is SO much faster.
Related
I've been doing front end web work for a while. I maintain several company websites and etc, mostly on Joomla. I'm getting bored with it and I really want to expand in to development. I have a few web app ideas for the company and some personal stuff I'd like to do.
Ive decided I want to learn Ruby and Rails and have been pursuing it for about a month now. I read a lot of tutorials and work through stuff I find online. I'm also diving in to git and trying to use it more.
I feel like Windows is not going to be conducive to me getting efficient at this. I know that you can, and some do, develop in Windows but I'm wondering if its time for me to move past it.
I picked Ruby to be my first real programming language because of the simplicity I read about. For both Ruby and RoR and I want to be able to learn a language that will let me build apps and web apps that are cross platform.
On to the problem, I can't immerse myself completely in a linux world. I have to have photoshop and indesign for part of my job. So I'm thinking maybe I should just do a live usb key install and take it back and forth between work and home. Is that a better solution than dual booting for what I want to do? I also realize that a mac would give me the best of both worlds, but I am budget constrained and I can't make that leap yet.
Also, is there a good place to hang out to learn more? I have paid codeschool and tutsplus accounts. Should I be back on IRC? What do you think? I'm looking for guidance more than anything I guess. I feel kind of lost on where to go how to not waste time and start developing real skills. Thanks.
You should also checkout the vagrant project which creates headless (non-gui) VMs and makes it easier to work with your files, etc in Windows while the code actually gets run on the Vagrant VM. Also, since its headless, the graphical UI isn't eating up resources and has less impact on your host machine.
Check out these resources:
http://www.vagrantup.com/
http://blog.dcxn.com/2013/07/12/introduction-to-vagrant-for-rails-developers/
http://railscasts.com/episodes/292-virtual-machines-with-vagrant
*Also if you're learning Rails, you MUST checkout Railscasts http://railscasts.com/
The last thing I knew about this is that:
In Linux you can use RVM which handles pretty well everything about your Ruby environment. In Windows I tried pik, but it does not have support to install newer Rubies.
Also, Linux console is much friendlier than Windows one, regarding appearance and functionality. I have explored console2 for Windows, but it did not feel so comfortable that time.
In Linux you have plugins like oh-my-zsh which allows you to speed up your development. But maybe there are kind of this plugin for Windows.
Other than those, I don't know why you should choose Linux VM.
I've developed a Rails app under Windows, and it turned out to be a huge mistake. Near the end of the development, I had to make my webapp multithreaded. The default Rails server does not allow multithreading, and all the alternative servers are either Linux-only, or I couldn't get them to work.
I also considered using JRuby(because Java threads), but by then my app was too big to convert to JRuby(there are some syntax differences that I couldn't track, and I relayed on some gems that don't work on JRuby). However, if you go for JRuby from the beginning, you might be able to pull it off.
We have a very simple function (We look something up from a third party database and return an answer. It's literally five lines of code.) We would like to offload this task from our main server because we expect a high volume of traffic for this one function and would like to optimize it.
We are thinking about testing the promise of many cloud/PaaS providers, where they handle scaling and performance responsibilities.
We're most interested in Rails environments, but are curious to hear experiences from others about any company in the space.
Here are the PaaS companies we found that supports Rails:
1) Heroku
2) DotCloud
3) Duostack
Questions:
1) Do you know of other Rails-specific companies? Also feel free to list non-Rails companies since we're interested in following other companies in case they eventually provide Rails support.
2) How has your experience been with these companies?
Foreword and disclaimer: I work for DotCloud; so the following might be biased. You've been warned.
DotCloud could be interesting for you if you like the following features:
run something else than Ruby (what about some Django or Pylons code talking with your SQL DB? Or even some PHP blog like WordPress or Drupal, using the same user authentication database?)
experiment with databases like Redis or MongoDB, or background ruby workers, without paying for add-ons
SSH access, crontab access (without requiring an add-on)
cheaper workers (I didn't come up with this one; some of our users coming from the Heroku world told us that workers were insanely expensive there)
Duostack is indeed very nice if you want to mix specifically Rails and Node.js. I've been told that they had awesome auto-configuration facilities.
Finally, if you only plan to do Rails and nothing else, ever, you might as well stick with Heroku since they've been in that business for a while, and are probably more mature than the first two of the batch.
Shameless plug: DotCloud is offering a beta test drive; so if you want to see what it looks like, just subscribe to the beta and you will be quickly enough be able to see for yourself. Heroku has a free tier as well.
You could add EngineYard in the mix - but i'd be inclined to use Heroku as my first choice, Dotcloud second (it's a newish product, and is very good but still in development)
If you want more control over your app/servers or want to run it on any cloud or your own infrastructure without having to download/deploy anything, you can try Cloud 66 (www.cloud66.com)
Disclaimer: I work for Cloud 66
A lot has changed on the scene since this question was asked. We recently looked into these services and settled on Heroku, but even more recently decided to continue managing my own deployments directly on EC2. Here are some points not mentioned in the other answers.
Heroku
Now supports much more than just ruby
Has really great-looking support for PostgreSQL
Uses LXC for process containers, like DotCloud
DotCloud
Is now Docker, and is putting a lot of manpower into developing docker.io
Doesn't have a free tier any more
I'm not sure if DotCloud is using Docker internally or not, since the docs say explicitly it isn't production-ready yet.
Our decision to stick with plain EC2 was motivated by the fact that it's cheaper and affords a lot more flexibility. For example, we use local-only http servers behind our public server to do some of our request processing, which doesn't really fit into the PaaS models out there. We would have had to reimplement all our back-end components as redis workers, and pay for them as additional dynos. The fact that Amazon RDS now supports PostgreSQL was also a compelling factor. Incidentally, Amazon has a full-stack PaaS offering as well, Elastic Beanstalk.
Just stumbled upon the question. There are similar ones around here. The problem is also: The PaaS scene is changing very quickly. New vendors are popping in every week or so.
Nowadays OpenShift from Red Hat might also be mentioned here as a Ruby PaaS.
OFFTOPIC + shameless plug: I have compiled a list of PHP PaaS here: http://blog.fortrabbit.com/comparing-cloud-hosting-platforms/
I have 4 servers behind a load balancer and a staging server, a db server, and a utility server for a web application that hosts a number of web sites.
Should I make the jump to Chef to manage these servers or should I just maintain them manually? The servers were built using sprinkle but at that time there were only two. Now that there are four maintenance is becoming more of an issue.
I'd like to hear experiences and the pros and cons of chef and other chef-like tools.
Thanks!
We moved to Chef, and we now have a 1 minute redeployment for our app. So it certainly pays off.
However it took a long time (a few months) to get to the point where we were happy with the chef deployment strategy. With hindsight we would have had several spare boxes around to try out a 'from scratch' deployment. I certainly wouldn't advise trying chef in a production environment without an exact mirror of the setup and lots and lots of tests, nor would I advise using chef on a setup that hasn't been 'cheffed' from scratch.
Having said that, Chef is far better than the other options we looked at and now that we are out the other side it's a breeze deploying a new version of the app on multiple servers. In future I'll be using it for any staging or production environment I have.
In summary, yes, but only if your client/employer is aware that it may take some time before they see the benefits, which will be considerable.
Chef has a steep learning curve, so it will take a while - at least a few weeks - to become familiar with how to use it.
But once you pick up the basics, it is a very handy system, and can simplify any number of tasks - even for the smallest of infrastructures.
A few notes for when you start.
You will be setting up and tearing down cloud servers dozens of times, just to get the hang of it. Experiment.
The standard opscode cookbooks (github.com/opscode/cookbooks) are very useful. But you will need to extend/customize many of them for your particular case. And you will need to search the 'net for cookbooks that are missing from the opscode/cookbooks repository.
Read the opscode cookbooks, and read the 37signals cookbooks too.
The application and database cookbooks are geared towards standard Rails apps with MySQL and Memcached. To the extent that this describes you, you are way in luck.
How can i write a cloud-aware application? e.g. an application that takes benefit of being deployed on cloud. Is it same as an application that runs or a vps/dedicated server? if not then what are the differences? are there any design changes? What are the procedures that i need to take if i am to migrate an application to cloud-aware?
Also i am about to implement a web application idea which would need features like security, performance, caching, and more importantly free. I have been comparing some frameworks and found that django has least RAM/CPU usage and works great in prefork+threaded mode, but i have also read that django based sites stop to respond with huge load of connections. Other frameworks that i have seen/know are Zend, CakePHP, Lithium/Cake3, CodeIgnitor, Symfony, Ruby on Rails....
So i would leave this to your opinion as well, suggest me a good free framework based on my needs.
Finally thanks for reading the essay ;)
I feel a matrix moment coming on... "what is the cloud? The cloud is all around us, a prison for your program..." (what? the FAQ said bring your sense of humour...)
Ok so seriously, what is the cloud? It depends on the implementation but usual features include scalable computing resource and a charge per cpu-hour, storage area etc. So yes, it is a bit like developing on your VPS/a normal server.
As I understand it, Google App Engine allows you to consume as much as you want. The back-end resource management is done by Google and billed to you and you pay for what you use. I believe there's even a free threshold.
Amazon EC2 exposes an API that actually allows you to add virtual machine instances (someone correct me please if I'm wrong) having pre-configured them, deploy another instance of your web app, talk between private IP ranges if you wish (slicehost definitely allow this). As such, EC2 can allow you to act like a giant load balancer on the front-end passing work off to a whole number of VMs on the back end, or expose all that publicly, take your pick. I'm not sure on the exact detail because I didn't build the system but that's how I understand it.
I have a feeling (but I know least about Azure) that on Azure, resource management is done automatically, for you, by Microsoft, based on what your app uses.
So, in summary, the cloud is different things depending on which particular cloud you choose. EC2 seems to expose an API for managing resource, GAE and Azure appear to be environments which grow and shrink in the background based on your use.
Note: I am aware there are certain constraints developing in GAE, particularly with Java. In a minute, I'll edit in another thread where someone made an excellent comment on one of my posts to this effect.
Edit as promised, see this thread: Cloud Agnostic Architecture?
As for a choice of framework, it really doesn't matter as far as I'm concerned. If you are planning on deploying to one of these platforms you might want to check framework/language availability. I personally have just started Django and love it, having learnt python a while ago, so, in my totally unbiased opinion, use Django. Other developers will probably recommend other things, based on their preferences. What do you know? What are you most comfortable with? What do you like the most? I'd go with that. I chose Django purely because I'm not such a big fan of PHP, I like Python and I was comfortable with the framework when I initially played around with it.
Edit: So how do you write cloud-aware code? You design your software in such a way it fits on one of these architectures. Again, see the cloud-agnostic thread for some really good discussion on ways of doing this. For example, you might talk to some services on GAE which scale. That they are on GAE (example) doesn't really matter, you use loose coupling ideas. In essence, this is just a step up from the web service idea.
Also, another feature of the cloud I forgot to mention is the idea of CDN's being provided for you - some cloud implementations might move your data around the globe to make it more efficient to serve, or just because that's where they've got space. If that's an issue, don't use the cloud.
I cannot answer your question - I'm not experienced in such projects - but I can tell you one thing... both CakePHP and CodeIgniter are designed for PHP4 - in other words: for really old technology. And it seems nothing is going to change in their case. Symfony (especially 2.0 version which is still in heavy beta) is worth considering, but as I said on the very beginning - I can not support this with my own experience.
For designing applications for deployment for the cloud, the main thing to consider if recoverability. If your server is terminated, you may lose all of your data. If you're deploying on Amazon, I'd recommend putting all data that you need persisted onto an Elastic Block Storage (EBS) device. This would be data like user generated content/files, the database files and logs. I also use the EBS snapshot on a 5 day rotation so that's backed up itself. That said, I've had a cloud server up on AWS for over a year without any issues.
As for frameworks, I'm giving Grails a try at the minute and I'm quite enjoying it. Built to be syntactically similar to Rails but runs on the JVM. It means you can take advantage of all the Java goodness, like threading, concurrency and all the great libraries out there to build your web application.
What would you suggest as the best server stack for a dedicated server which needs to host Rails SaaS application (not a lot of traffic but need to keep options open for future).
Regardless of your application, you're probably going to want certain standard components:
nginx/passenger will work for small apps or large apps. You should use it.
Unless you have a specific reason to use something else, you should use MySQL since the vast majority of the Rails community uses it and you will be able to get better support.
You should have memcached running right away, even if you don't use it for much yet. You're going to want to be able to seamlessly add caching as it's needed.
You're going to want to have a process for setting up a new server that is fully automated. That way, if you need to spin up a second server, it's trivial. If you ssh into a box to configure it, this means that if you need another server in a pinch (or the first server gets corrupted), you're going to need to remember all the things you did. Not a good place to be in an emergency.
You should be on the very latest version of Ruby on Rails, and upgrade frequently. Keep an eye on deprecations and changes and make the suggested changes as early as possible. When Rails 3 is released, use it.
Engine Yard, where I work, uses an open source tool called chef to manage our automated deployment solution. That's probably a good option.
As ever with a question that broad, it depends. Some things to think about:
What does the application do?
Does the application use any database vendor-specific SQL?
What are the availability requirements?
What are the performance requirements?
How much data will there be?
Which server stacks do you or the person who will be administering it have experience of?
What is your budget?
One thing I can say with complete certainty is that you don't want to be using Windows because Rails work best on a Linux/UNIX stack.
A lot of it depends on your needs. If the model isn't very complex and/or your traffic is fairly low, you can probably get away with apache, mongrel, and sqlite on some *nix.
If you start seeing performance issues, you can add some memcached into the mix, upgrade (relatively painlessly) to mysql, and use a different server (passenger/nginx).
There are also alternate ruby implementations that have some performance boosting changes. Rubninous and jRuby come to mind.