http://www.stevelongdo.com/articles/2006/11/21/rubygems-and-memory-again en-us 40 <p>I&#8217;ve been toying with switching over to <a href=":http://mephistoblog.com">Mephisto</a> and spending some extra time studying memory consumption, which is quite a bit higher in <a href=":http://mephistoblog.com">Mephisto</a> than <a href=":http://typosphere.org">Typo</a>. Using the latest svn trunk of <a href=":http://rubygems.org">RubyGems</a> (r1100), the bug with multiple <strong>Gem::GemPathSearcher</strong> instances being created has been fixed, but now there is a different problem. Multiple <strong>Gem::SourceIndex</strong> instances are created. I can see where this might be needed with the recent <em>&#8220;incremental updates to the gem list&#8221;</em> change that went into <a href=":http://rubygems.org">RubyGems</a>, it doesn&#8217;t make sense to have these hanging around in memory for the lifetime of a <a href=":http://rubyonrails.org">Rails</a> application.</p> <p>I took the same approach to a fix as last time, adding the <code>require</code> and <code>include</code> for <strong>Singleton</strong> into the <em>SourceIndex.rb</em> class. This worked fine for loading up <a href=":http://mephistoblog.com">Mephisto</a> and indeed reduced the memory use substantially.</p> <table> <tr> <td>r1100 without <strong>Singleton</strong> </td> <td> &#8211; <strong>Gem::SourceIndex x2(1062363)</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td>r1100 <ins>with</ins> <strong>Singleton</strong> </td> <td> &#8211; <strong>Gem::SourceIndex x1(97621)</strong></td> </tr> </table> <p><br /> I haven&#8217;t checked to see how this change impairs <a href=":http://rubygems.org">RubyGems</a> for getting new gems, update, etc. but it seems like there needs to be a different amount of information loaded for bootstrapping the <code>gem</code> command, versus a running <a href="http://ruby-lang.org">Ruby</a> or <a href=":http://rubyonrails.org">Ruby on Rails</a> application.</p> <ul> <li>Does the running application <strong>really</strong> have a need to know the complete dependency hierarchy for <strong>all</strong> of the installed gems on a system?</li> </ul> <ul> <li>Even if your application did, would you want that information stored into memory from startup to shutdown?</li> </ul> Tue, 21 Nov 2006 22:47:00 +0000 urn:uuid:25fbd8e6-7d57-4719-975d-1a4c0c19e050 Steve Longdo http://www.stevelongdo.com/articles/2006/11/21/rubygems-and-memory-again rubygems rails memory