From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: andrew@pimlott.net (Andrew Pimlott)
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 11:31:58 -0700
Subject: [sup-talk] sup-sync dies; memory limit?
In-Reply-To: <1242148438-sup-9068@entry>
References: <20090508164226.GA28854@pimlott.net>
	<20090511182615.GI28854@pimlott.net> <1242148438-sup-9068@entry>
Message-ID: <20090512183158.GO28854@pimlott.net>

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:19:48AM -0700, William Morgan wrote:
> Reformatted excerpts from Andrew Pimlott's message of 2009-05-11:
> > On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 09:42:26AM -0700, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> > > I don't have any memory limits set.  Is it possible that sup-sync or
> > > ruby uses some itself?  Any other ideas?
> 
> Very mysterious.

I cannot reproduce the problem anymore, but as far as I know, nothing
changed on my system (other than the inbox I am testing with evolving
routinely).  sup-sync from the 0.7 gem now runs to completion and never
uses more than ~36M virtual memory (before it got up around 60M before
crashing).  It doesn't seem possible that the git copy of sup affected
the installed gem.  So I'm at a complete loss too.  

Andrew