Absolutely not neccessary to find a solution.  I'm using rackup to
drive the thing, and I just changed the server to mongrel. Works fine.

-g

On Oct 7, 10:14 pm, John Mettraux <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 4:58 AM, gmcinnes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Let me know if you have any questions.  Probably I've done something
> > here to cause the problem, but I can't figure out what.
>
> > I had things isolated to the point where thin hands off the request to
> > EventMachine, and I know that ruote is using EM too, so I thought it
> > might be some conflict, but now I'm not so sure... when I investigated
> > today, I couldn't isolate that point.
>
> Hello Grant,
>
> ruote 0.9.x is not using EM, ruote 2.0 uses it if present.
>
> I've played with your test case for a while and could reproduce the
> issue with ruote 0.9.21 (trunk).
>
> Sinatra 0.9.4 with thin 1.2.4 on ruby 1.8.7p72.
>
> With ruote "trunk" :
>
> running test.sh takes 30s, 60s, 60s. Adding "nada" as the output of
> the "post /process" runs with the same times.
>
> With ruote 0.9.20
>
> running test.sh triggers a few stack level too deep at the beginning,
> but test.sh always replies in like 0.035s, consistently, and the
> "stack level too deep" vanishes.
>
> That's weird.
>
> It took me a bit of back and forth, some time and now I'm wondering.
> Since you've left the issue sleep for 2.5 months, is it necessary to
> find a solution ?
>
> Ruote 2.0 is coming along well and the integration with sinatra[/thin]
> is promising :
>
>  http://github.com/jmettraux/ruote-http
>  http://github.com/kennethkalmer/ruote-kit
>
> Best regards, thanks for the feedback,
>
> --
> John Mettraux   -  http://jmettraux.wordpress.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" group.
to post : send email to [email protected]
to unsubscribe : send email to [email protected]
more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to