Project

General

Profile

Actions

Feature #12529

closed

Use RMagick gem to create thumbnails when available

Added by Alex Shulgin over 11 years ago. Updated about 11 years ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
-
Category:
Code cleanup/refactoring
Target version:
-
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
Resolution:
Wont fix

Description

Attached patch uses RMagick library calls to create image attachment thumbnails when rmagick gem is available, otherwise degrades to shell call to 'convert' utility.


Files

Actions #1

Updated by Etienne Massip over 11 years ago

  • Category changed from Attachments to Code cleanup/refactoring
  • Target version set to Candidate for next major release
Actions #2

Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang about 11 years ago

I don't know if we should rely on RMagick more than we currently do. The latest release of this gem is almost 3 year old and it looks like we have some issues with using RMagick: #12480, #12732. Please, correct me if I'm wrong but I'm not sure that using RMagick to generate thumbnails is more efficient.

Actions #3

Updated by Alex Shulgin about 11 years ago

Jean-Philippe Lang wrote:

I don't know if we should rely on RMagick more than we currently do. The latest release of this gem is almost 3 year old and it looks like we have some issues with using RMagick: #12480, #12732. Please, correct me if I'm wrong but I'm not sure that using RMagick to generate thumbnails is more efficient.

I'm all for removing dependency on ImageMagick library (ever tried ImageScience: http://docs.seattlerb.org/ImageScience.html ?) It just strikes me as extra inefficient to run `convert` via shell for what you could just bind the lib, which I believe RMagick does.

--
Alex

Actions #4

Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang about 11 years ago

Alex Shulgin wrote:

I'm all for removing dependency on ImageMagick library

I was speaking about the RMagick gem, not the ImageMagick library

It just strikes me as extra inefficient to run `convert` via shell for what you could just bind the lib, which I believe RMagick does.

This is slower indeed but memory consumption is much lower too.

Actions #5

Updated by Alex Shulgin about 11 years ago

Jean-Philippe Lang wrote:

This is slower indeed but memory consumption is much lower too.

Hm, I don't see how sane implementation of library binding would be consuming noticeable amounts of memory, which suggests RMagick implementation isn't sane.

Actions #7

Updated by Alex Shulgin about 11 years ago

OK, I see your point. I think this item can be closed.

Thanks.
--
Alex

Actions #8

Updated by Daniel Felix about 11 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Closed
  • Target version deleted (Candidate for next major release)
  • Resolution set to Wont fix

Hi Alex,

thanks anyway for your suggestion. I'm closing this ticket now.

Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF