[Rubygems-developers] Updating source index is slow
tom.clarke at gmail.com
Wed Nov 10 14:39:46 EST 2004
I've been lurking here for a bit, and just let me say that ruby gems
is looking great and everything I wanted for the now defunct
RAAInstall (which I gave life to and subsequently killed).
The issue I encounted with raa install was that for an RAA sized
database (which gems isn't yet) it was very difficult to get the
information down to a reasonable size. I ended up producing a
drastically compressed format (in terms of what data I put in the
download file). The gems I've seen are comparatively verbose.
I would suggest that the end solution probably needs to be either of:
* A gentoo like system where each package has it's own file, and be
synced with rsync or a clone (this has the benefit of being easy to
mirror in an efficient manner)
* A client server system where package details are queried on demand.
Probably not necessary yet, but perhaps something to think about.
One question I had. Is anyone was working on making DBI into gems?
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 19:28:23 +0000 (WET), Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng
<hgs at dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Chad Fowler wrote:
> > On 09-Nov-04, at 9:47 PM, Patrick May wrote:
> >> I may be ignorant here -- I'm assuming the client is hitting
> >> http://gems.rubyforge.org/yaml
> > You're right. It grabs (and caches) all of the gem metadata. Your idea for
> While my brain is still fizzing with this stuff:
> Is there a reason why the Yaml itself can't be a gem? That would allow us
> to use the versioning information gems already have for this, which
> might help with all the Last-Modified weirdness you were getting.
> If it were a gem, then could we make gem update 'patch' what we have,
> rather than do a full install? Maybe not immediately, but in the
> Rubygems-developers mailing list
> Rubygems-developers at rubyforge.org
More information about the Rubygems-developers