[LRUG] REE vs Ruby 1.9.2

[Sam Livingston-Gray]

Wasn't there a patch to address this a few months ago -- something about slow require statements? Peter Cooper wrote something up on rubyinside, I think.

Have seen a few tweets about bugs in 1.9.3 p0 so far (see @JEG2).

--
(Sent from a mobile device with a tiny onscreen keyboard.  As such, my email may be more terse than you've come to expect from me.)

On Oct 31, 2011, at 12:44 AM, Andrew Stewart <boss at airbladesoftware.com> wrote:

> On 29 Oct 2011, at 14:01, Kristen Eisenberg wrote:
>> I know Ruby 1.9.2 is better than 1.8.7 in many ways, but does it improve memory usage etc to a degree similar to REE?
> 
> Morning Kristen,
> 
> I recently moved a Rails 3.0.10 app from REE to Ruby 1.9.2.  I haven't been able to examine the memory usage yet because I've been distracted by the astonishingly slow start-up time for my app.  It went from 15s or so on REE to 3-4min on Ruby 1.9.2.
> 
> However Ruby 1.9.3-p0 is now out and it solves the slow start-up problem.  37signals are using 1.9.3 in production which is good enough for me, so I'm moving to 1.9.3 as soon as I can.
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Andy Stewart
> -------
> http://airbladesoftware.com
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at lists.lrug.org
> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org