# Byebug behaving miserably due to multiple unicorn workers in dev

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/byebug-behaving-miserably-due-to-multiple-unicorn-workers-in-dev/96184>\
**Category:** Development\
**Created:** [September 2, 2018, 6:07am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/byebug-behaving-miserably-due-to-multiple-unicorn-workers-in-dev/96184 "2018-09-02T06:07:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tgxworld](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/tgxworld/32/106117_2.png) [@tgxworld](https://meta.discourse.org/u/tgxworld)\
**Post date:** [September 3, 2018, 12:04am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/byebug-behaving-miserably-due-to-multiple-unicorn-workers-in-dev/96184/3 "2018-09-03T00:04:07Z")

</div>

`byebug` doesn’t work very well when you have multiple processes printing to STDOUT. I actually have `UNICORN_WORKERS=1` and `UNICORN_SIDEKIQS=0` in my development env.

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/byebug-behaving-miserably-due-to-multiple-unicorn-workers-in-dev/96184)._