incubator-deltacloud-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tong Li <>
Subject Re: syslog in DeltaCloud 0.4.0
Date Mon, 12 Sep 2011 18:11:01 GMT

there were two screen captures inline in my email, can not see them in your
response (probably because your email system does not support inline
pictures), let me send as attachment.

(See attached file: slow performance screen capture.png)

Tong Li
Emerging Technologies & Standards

From:	David Lutterkort <>
Date:	09/12/2011 01:43 PM
Subject:	Re: syslog in DeltaCloud 0.4.0

On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 08:34 -0400, Tong Li wrote:
> I do not think using "lib" to reference anything is a good practice. It
> just causes problems. if not using lib, DC artifacts can be used by other
> gems. when some reference lib, then it actually won't work,  problem
> described in item 2 is very easy to fix, simply remove "lib/", then it
> work just fine. If it is not an issue for DC, but it is not even a good
> practice beside the point of reuse.

Yes, I agree; and that will be fixed in due time. I just don't want to
spin another release candidate and hold another vote just for minor
fixes like this.

> for item3, when I used dc as a gem, used in my own gem, it did not work,

As I said, there is zero guarantee that using the dc server gem as a
library works.

> the method is undefined, even though integer.rb was required already, not
> sure what went wrong.

Hmm .. weird.

> for item4, the singularize method actually require i18n, can you check if
> your env actually has i18n, if you do, then you are probably using it
> without knowing you are.

This is from lib/deltacloud/core_ext/string.rb:

          def singularize
            return self.gsub(/es$/, '') if self =~ /sses$/
            self.gsub(/s$/, '')

As you can tell, there's no dependency on i18n. As I said in my previous
mail, we do not use active_support or i18n, even though we have method
names in core_ext that follow commonly known method names from Rails.

> item 1 described in previous email was a bug. Please take a look.

As Michal explained, it's redundant code with no adverse effects. For an
array a, '' behaves the same as ' { |x| x }', which is
perfectly fine for the use in views/instances/show.html.haml - certainly
something that should be cleaned up, but not a release stopper.

> for the slow performance, I can not be sure what is causing it. please
> a look at this firebug capture, not sure why the API GET instances took
> 25.07s, not sure why it references include.js from

That is very strange - there is no such load for me; there's also no
reference to either include.js or It seems this isn't coming
from Deltacloud.

If you google for, you'll find various posts. I didn't
follow them enough to determine if this is benign or malware, but would
probably warrant closer follow-up.

>  I am very
> sure that 0.3.0 won't take that long. Can not say it was because of thin
> webrick, or browser version, when I took the snap shot of firebug, I was
> using latest firebug and firefox.

Very strange.

> this is to get all the instances.
> Another one for rendering a particular instance.

Did you mean to attach more details ?


  • Unnamed multipart/mixed (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message