Go REST with Rails

David Heinemeir Hansson is speaking on Go REST with Rails. David wasn't interested in programming but more interested in programs. They decided that at Basecamp they should have APIs. In 2004, not a whole lot of people knew about REST. Flickr API was very unsatisfying at that time. He didn't have an approach that they could hold on to encapsulate development. REST is based on HTTP. Problem with HTTP is that it is like Ogre and Ogre have layers (so do Onions). When he was doing Basecamp he didn't want to worry about GET or POST.

Using REST is like re-discovering the HTTP protocol. Most developers overlook the depth of protocol. REST has very closely assigned relationship with HTTP. REST is like blue-cheese in the sense that it is very much acquired taste. The first time you try it, it seems disgusting. Once you get hooked on it, it is really tasty. REST is a really well thought out approach. That's why there is a very harsh barrier to entry.

What are the barriers? Foundation of REST comes from a guy named Roy Fielding. In chapter 5 of his 2000 dissertation, he introduces REST. He says

"This chapter introduces and elaborates the Representational State Transfer (REST) architectural style for distributed hypermedia systems, describing the software engineering principles guiding REST and the interaction constraints chosen to retain those principles, while contrasting them to the constraints of other architectural styles."

He is talking about WS-*.

REST has infiltrated Rails in the past few years. Creating a REST application is as simple as creating a Rails application. Next he guides people through it. Multiple representational ability of Rails reall helps as you shouldn't need to re-do the work just in order to have another representation.

In PostsController you can do the following to add more representations:

respond_to do |format|
format.json {render :json => @post}
end

ActiveResource is a convention that builds on same principles as ActiveRecord. Rails is all about Convention over Configuration. Rails allows you to spot natural borders.

David is a great speaker and it was a pleasure to sit in his session finally. I do however wish he'd talked more about scaling REST services, but may be the audience wasn't right.

Rails/Java Web Developer: Job Opening in New York

If you're a rock star web developer with expertise in Rails/Java/PHP and MySQL, I have several exciting opportunities available in New York.

I've posted the job description for web developer and graphic designers at my MySQL blog.

About the company: Give Real is a well-funded startup in the midst of an exciting period of growth and success. Our technology uses a patent pending platform that combines the ubiquity of credit card transactions and the power of social networks to create a new gifting experience.

Facebook turns to gearing to buy more gear

The joke among scalability professionals is that Facebook runs on Rails because of its need to keep throwing money at its scalability issues. There are some rumors about Facebook's poorly chosen network based partitioning (sharding) strategy. Facebook has now announced
that it will be borrowing $100 million to buy approximately 50,000 servers. This will significantly raise Facebook's gearing ratio bringing it closer to being a high geared company.

Facebook is not the only one with massive need for servers. Business Week quotes Forrester Research's Frank E. Gillet who estimates that Google is consuming as much as half a million servers each year whereas Microsoft is buying close to 200,000 servers a year.

As several media sites have reported, capital expenditure like this is an ideal reason for not diluting equity. Jim Labe, CEO of Triple Point, a company that specializes in lending venture money to start ups, tells Business Week:

“ The last thing the entrepreneur wants to do is see those precious equity dollars flowing into equipment purchases. It's a very unproductive use of equity to plow it into fixed assets.”
However, many industry pundits ponder whether this indicates Facebook's trouble in raising more venture capital. Some even wonder whether Microsoft over-valued Facebook with its $240 million investment for a 1.6% stake in the company. CNN raises a similar question as to why Microsoft isn't buying Facebook.