Rails - Nov 2011 - How to get Rails 3.1's Cache store (FileStore) to work with Rack::Sendfile

Hey - I need your input regarding a problem I''ve come across.
I''ll first
explain what the problem is, and what I think the solution is. If I
misunderstood how things work, please let me know.

# The problem

I''m using Dragonfly (on-the-fly file processing) to serve images.
Dragonfly
uses Rack::Cache to cache the processed images so subsequent requests are
served by Rack::Cache. The problem lies in Rack::Cache getting too busy
serving images. I thought the fix would be to let Rack::Cache use
Apache''s
X-Sendfile to serve images.  You can read my journey in a StackOverflow
question I posted <http://stackoverflow.com/q/7980106/61018>.

# The solution

The solution would be to enable whatever''s needed to get Rack::Cache to
serve files using X-Sendfile through Rack::Sendfile. After poking around
Rack::Cache, I found out that none of the Rack::Cache Entitystores are used
-- what''s being used is Rails'' own storage
solution<https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/3-1-stable/activesupport/lib/active_support/cache/file_store.rb>
.

Is there a reason that FileStore doesn''t support Rack::Sendfile at the
moment (why it uses Marshal)? What would be the easiest way to get to what
I need? Can I just tell Rails to use Rack::Cache''s Disk entitystore? If
not, what do you guys think of letting the *body* of the *response* of *
FileStore* (yes, a bit of a mouthful) to respond to `to_path`?

Thanks!
Ramon Tayag

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

On Nov 5, 5:14 pm, Ramon Tayag
<ra...-xzN5gvnvA7heoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> Hey - I need your input regarding a problem I''ve come across.
I''ll first
> explain what the problem is, and what I think the solution is. If I
> misunderstood how things work, please let me know.
>
> # The problem
>
> I''m using Dragonfly (on-the-fly file processing) to serve images.
Dragonfly
> uses Rack::Cache to cache the processed images so subsequent requests are
> served by Rack::Cache. The problem lies in Rack::Cache getting too busy
> serving images. I thought the fix would be to let Rack::Cache use
Apache''s
> X-Sendfile to serve images.  You can read my journey in a StackOverflow
> question I posted <http://stackoverflow.com/q/7980106/61018>.
>
Not really answering your question, but I''ve handled this situation by
putting varnish in front of apache.

Fred


> # The solution
>
> The solution would be to enable whatever''s needed to get
Rack::Cache to
> serve files using X-Sendfile through Rack::Sendfile. After poking around
> Rack::Cache, I found out that none of the Rack::Cache Entitystores are used
> -- what''s being used is Rails'' own storage
>
solution<https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/3-1-stable/activesupport/lib/acti...>
> .
>
> Is there a reason that FileStore doesn''t support Rack::Sendfile at
the
> moment (why it uses Marshal)? What would be the easiest way to get to what
> I need? Can I just tell Rails to use Rack::Cache''s Disk
entitystore? If
> not, what do you guys think of letting the *body* of the *response* of *
> FileStore* (yes, a bit of a mouthful) to respond to `to_path`?
>
> Thanks!
> Ramon Tayag
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

Isn''t Varnish for much busier sites though? I tried going this route
but I
thought that this might be overkill.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-talk/-/_MYfFRswfaIJ.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

On Nov 6, 2:49 am, Ramon
<ramon.ta...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> Isn''t Varnish for much busier sites though? I tried going this
route but I
> thought that this might be overkill.
Well it does add one more thing to what your server runs but I found
it relatively easy to use. It does also have the benefit of cutting
ruby out of the picture completely when serving assets.

Fred

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.