Hang on, did you read this?
http://backgroundrb.rubyforge.org/scheduling/#restart_on_schedule On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Stephen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Could someone fill me in on why scheduled processes as it currently stands > are required to stay in memory the entire time that they exist. We were > very excited about using backgroundrb to replace our cron'd rake jobs > collection (probally about 20 or so tasks) but at 40megs a piece once our > entire rails stack loaded, it just lead to unacceptable memory usage. > > Basically I'm just wondering what the back story on this is.. It seems > like having one task that always resides in memory that is responsible for > spawning tasks as the schedule dictates would be far more efficient - but > I'm sure theres some reasons why its implemented as it is right now.. I > suppose I could take all of our functionality and cram it into one worker > with many functions but that doesn't seem as clean as I'd hoped it would be. > > Thanks! > Stephen > > > > _______________________________________________ > Backgroundrb-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/backgroundrb-devel > -- Let them talk of their oriental summer climes of everlasting conservatories; give me the privilege of making my own summer with my own coals. http://gnufied.org
_______________________________________________ Backgroundrb-devel mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/backgroundrb-devel
