Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Deprecate Zeronet (#414) #415

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 17, 2024

Conversation

Hooverdan96
Copy link
Member

no updates for 3 years to custom docker image as well as repository

Fixes #414 .

Checklist

  • Passes JSONlint validation
  • Entry removed from root.json

Copy link
Member

@phillxnet phillxnet left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Hooverdan96 Thanks again for taking care of yet-another Rock-on removal. Much appreciated.

And well done remembering that comma removal also :) .

@phillxnet phillxnet merged commit 12a55d4 into rockstor:master Dec 17, 2024
@phillxnet
Copy link
Member

PRODUCTION published

@phillxnet
Copy link
Member

@Hooverdan96 This and the other Rock-on removal has the test system I have here to below 6 seconds for Rock-on info retrieval:

[17/Dec/2024 19:17:10] INFO [storageadmin.views.rockon:504] Rock-on definitions retrieved in: 5.86 seconds.

It's been creeping up of late, re all these new additions. So always good to do some clear-out to balance this. We can't support an endless number of official Rock-ons.

@Hooverdan96 Hooverdan96 deleted the 414_deprecate_zeronet branch December 17, 2024 19:42
@Hooverdan96
Copy link
Member Author

Maybe as part of future dev, we can consider more of a delta pull or something (adding a "last downloaded"/"last updated" timestamp or something).

@phillxnet
Copy link
Member

phillxnet commented Dec 17, 2024

@Hooverdan96 Maybe, but we have to avoid complexity at almost all costs is my thinking. That last change we did re holding the ssl info really helped. Maybe just switching to a faster web-get method would do us. Plus I think there is server-side stuff we may be able to enable now also. But I'm concerned it will fail with older requests. That may also be a better route as we then server-side zip and cache. All pros and cons. We just need to keep an eye on that figure as we add more and more Rock-ons. But deleting them certainly helps :) .


And the following has some info re headers etc for requests:

It may be we will already accept compressed content by default. Not sure yet. In that doc example it shows:

'Accept-Encoding': 'identity, deflate, compress, gzip'

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Deprecate Zeronet
2 participants