# \[ANN\] BackgrounDRb release 1.0 available now **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [December 17, 2007, 1:24pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ann-backgroundrb-release-1-0-available-now/123407 "2007-12-17T13:24:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/ea666f/32.png) [@gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gnufied)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2007, 1:24pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ann-backgroundrb-release-1-0-available-now/123407/1 "2007-12-17T13:24:16Z")
Hi Folks, I am glad to announce 1.0 release of BackgrounDRb. This would be a major release since 0.2 release of BackgrounDRb. Here is a brief summary of changes: - BackgrounDRb is DRb no longer. It makes use of EventDriven network programming library packet ( [http://packet.googlecode.com](http://packet.googlecode.com) ). - Since we moved to packet, many nasty thread issues, result hash corruption issues are totally gone. Lots of work has went in making scheduler rock solid stable. - Each worker, still runs in its own process, but each worker has a event loop of its own and all the events are triggered by the internal reactor loop. In a nutshell, you are not encouraged to use threads in your workers now. All the workers are already concurrent, but you are encouraged to use co-operative multitasking, rather than pre-emptive. A simple example is, - Now, you can schedule multiple methods with their own triggers. - Inside each worker, you can start tcp server or connect to a external server. Two important methods available in all workers are: - Each worker comes with a “thread\_pool” object, which can be used to run tasks concurrently. For example: - Each worker has access to method “register\_status” which can be used to update status of worker or store results. Results of a worker can be retrieved even after a worker has died. - Relevant URLs: \*\* Home Page: [http://backgroundrb.rubyforge.org](http://backgroundrb.rubyforge.org) \*\* SVN : [http://svn.devjavu.com/backgroundrb/trunk](http://svn.devjavu.com/backgroundrb/trunk) \*\* Bug Reports/Ticks: [http://backgroundrb.devjavu.com/report](http://backgroundrb.devjavu.com/report) - Credits : \*\* Ezra Z.,skaar for taking BackgrounDRb so far. \*\* Kevin for helping out with OSX issues. \*\* Andy for patches and initial testing. \*\* Paul for patching up README. \*\* Other initial users. \*\* Matz, Francis for general inspiration. – Let them talk of their oriental summer climes of everlasting conservatories; give me the privilege of making my own summer with my own coals. [http://gnufied.org](http://gnufied.org) ---
**Author:** ![gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/ea666f/32.png) [@gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gnufied)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2007, 9:04am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ann-backgroundrb-release-1-0-available-now/123407/2 "2007-12-18T09:04:32Z")
Hi On Dec 17, 2007 7:47 PM, Josh S. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Awesome, thanks for all the work, Hemant! Does this release also fix the > issue with BackgrounDRb writing ActiveRecord messages to the development > log? Yes, John, The issue you mention has been fixed in the latest release. > > ``` > > further request from rails ) and have a instance > > > > ``` > > > > - Now, you can schedule multiple methods with their own triggers. > > external server. Two important methods available in all workers are: > > to run tasks concurrently. For example: > > > > - Relevant URLs: > > \*\* Matz, Francis for general inspiration. > > removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid > > [http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/backgroundrb-devel](http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/backgroundrb-devel) – Let them talk of their oriental summer climes of everlasting conservatories; give me the privilege of making my own summer with my own coals. [http://gnufied.org](http://gnufied.org) ---
**Author:** ![gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/ea666f/32.png) [@gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gnufied)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 8:56pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ann-backgroundrb-release-1-0-available-now/123407/3 "2007-12-28T20:56:25Z")
On Dec 17, 7:23 am, hemant [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > ``` > block. It can still receive requests from rails. > > ``` > > you can configureBackgrounDRbto store these results in a memcache > > \*\* Other initial users. > \*\* Matz, Francis for general inspiration. > > – > Let them talk of their oriental summer climes of everlasting > conservatories; give me the privilege of making my own summer with my > own coals. > > [http://gnufied.org](http://gnufied.org) A bit of a late question, but is it fairly difficult to migrate old workers and tests to this new version of BDrb? James H. ---
**Author:** ![gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/ea666f/32.png) [@gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gnufied)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2007, 8:34am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ann-backgroundrb-release-1-0-available-now/123407/4 "2007-12-29T08:34:04Z")
Hi On Dec 29, 2007 1:25 AM, James H. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > A bit of a late question, but is it fairly difficult to migrate old > workers and tests to this new version of BDrb? No, it shouldn’t be difficult. There are incompatibilities and all are documented. You should read the README file and probably find out yourselves. ---
**Author:** ![gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/ea666f/32.png) [@gnufied](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/gnufied)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2008, 7:32pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ann-backgroundrb-release-1-0-available-now/123407/5 "2008-01-01T19:32:19Z")
On Dec 29 2007, 2:33 am, hemant [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Hi > > On Dec 29, 2007 1:25 AM, James H. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > > A bit of a late question, but is it fairly difficult to migrate old > > workers and tests to this new version of BDrb? > > No, it shouldn’t be difficult. There are incompatibilities and all are > documented. You should read the README file and probably find out > yourselves. Thanks Hemant. I look forward to investigating further. I’m just trying to figure out how valuable it is for me to re-code my workers. Happy new year, and thank-you again for your time and hard work! James