Feature #12529

Use RMagick gem to create thumbnails when available

Added by Alex Shulgin about 10 years ago. Updated about 10 years ago.

Status:ClosedStart date:
Priority:NormalDue date:
Assignee:-% Done:

0%

Category:Code cleanup/refactoring
Target version:-
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.

39ef6a5564c6b8a8ab74ee728640f01d1fb0b56f.diff Magnifier (1.8 KB) Alex Shulgin, 2012-12-06 23:55

History

#1 Updated by Etienne Massip about 10 years ago

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

#2 Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang about 10 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.

#3 Updated by Alex Shulgin about 10 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

#4 Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang about 10 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.

#5 Updated by Alex Shulgin about 10 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.

#7 Updated by Alex Shulgin about 10 years ago

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

Thanks.
--
Alex

#8 Updated by Daniel Felix about 10 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.

Also available in: Atom PDF