On 01/06/07, Jim Weirich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have one more idea on memory footprint issues, but would like to get > reports back on the beta before proceeding. >
I updated to 0.9.4.1 on my 96mb VPS and tried using 'gem update' again. It began a bulk update but the ruby process quickly hit 75mb RSS and then appeared to descend into swap-death as before. Then I ran an incremental update using -B. It updated about 6,600 gems and, as you expected, it was pretty slow. Nevertheless the process grew very slowly from 15 to about 28mb and completed successfully this time! I'm grateful to you and Ryan both for the effort you are putting into this problem. Regards, Matt -- Matt Mower :: http://matt.blogs.it/ _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
