Suggestions appear as you type. Use the up and down arrows to choose one and Enter to open it.

This page's audience our own tag's counts — open to see them
–Visits
–Page views
–Clicks to vendors
–Time on page
–Reading now
Clicks to vendors, by tool
  • –
Top countries
  • –
Devices
  • –

– · visits, page views and clicks counted by our own tag, which counts more than our checked analytics; every figure rounded down · how we count

Puma review

Free#32 of 36 in Web Server Software

A free, open-source Ruby server with concurrency, clustering, SSL, and restart controls.

5.8/10Editor score
Puma5.8 Visit Puma

Reviewed by iTechGuides Editors · Editorial team · Updated Oct 2026

Puma is an open-source web server for Ruby and Rack applications, aimed at teams deploying Ruby services with their applications. It supports MRI Ruby, JRuby, Rubinius, and other Ruby implementations, and runs on Windows, Linux, and self-hosted environments. Its core request handling is multithreaded, with configurable thread pools, while cluster mode adds multiple worker processes. Puma is installed as a Ruby gem rather than operated as a hosted service.

Its strongest fit is the Ruby ecosystem. Integrations include Ruby on Rails, Sinatra, Rack, Bundler, Capistrano, and systemd, giving application teams familiar deployment and service-management connections. The server also supports SSL sockets, TCP and UNIX socket binding, request buffering, WebSockets through partial hijack, and systemd notification and monitoring. Hot and phased restarts help manage application changes, while the built-in control and status server provides operational visibility. Configurable plugins and server-wide hooks extend how the server can be managed around a Ruby application.

Puma is a practical choice for Ruby teams that want free, open-source infrastructure with concurrency, clustering, SSL, monitoring, and restart controls in one server. Its narrow focus is also its clearest boundary: it is designed for Ruby and Rack applications and is deployed with the application rather than consumed as a hosted platform. The published specifications show support for HTTP/1.1, WebSockets, and multiple Ruby implementations, but not HTTP/2 or HTTP/3. Teams building Ruby applications around Rails, Sinatra, or Rack should consider Puma; teams requiring HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 support should choose a server that provides those protocols.

Puma pros and cons

  • Where it wins
    • Multithreaded handling with configurable thread pools
    • Cluster mode supports multiple worker processes
    • Rails, Sinatra, Rack, and systemd integrations
  • Where it doesn't
    • HTTP/2 support is not included
    • HTTP/3 support is not included
    • Requires deployment with the application as self-hosted software

Puma fact sheet, pricing and score →

Advertiser disclosure: iTechGuides is reader-supported. Vendors can pay for top positions in our rankings and for a place on other products' pages, and we may earn a commission when you click some links. Bought places stand at the number bought; this page and our disclosure say so. Paying vendors may get a fuller, more detailed review from our editors, and that review can change their score. How we rank.

Last updated · How we research and update