On Jul 21, 2008, at 1:36 PM, David Lutterkort wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 11:07 -0500, Luke Kanies wrote: >> Hrm, in reading more closely, I now see that your code will only ever >> initialize the @updates hash, it will never replace it. Once >> @updates >> is created, the content becomes static, which is obviously a problem. > > Ugh .. that's a problem with the current provider, too. I wouldn't be > surprised if that eats a lot of memory, too. Is there some callback > that > can be used to drop the memory allocated in @updates at the end of a > transaction ?
There's no class-level flush, only a resource-level flush. You could have each resource remove its own information from the hash, but that still wouldn't really solve the problem. I think rewriting it so that the providers didn't need access to the updates hash is the right way to do it. -- I used to get high on life but lately I've built up a resistance. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
