[openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website] Use Puma and File cache on dev env for good performance (PR #3810)

[Tom Hughes]

@tomhughes commented on this pull request.



> @@ -33,6 +34,8 @@
     config.cache_store = :null_store
   end
 
+  config.logger = ActiveSupport::TaggedLogging.new(ActiveSupport::Logger.new($stdout))

Your PR does not explain why you are making this change, which affects all users not just docker users.

> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ development:
 #  password: openstreetmap
 #  host: localhost
   encoding: utf8
+  pool: <%= ENV["DB_POOL"] || ENV['RAILS_MAX_THREADS'] || 5 %>

Your PR does not explain why you are making this change, which affects all users not just docker users.

> @@ -22,8 +22,9 @@
   if Rails.root.join("tmp/caching-dev.txt").exist?
     config.action_controller.perform_caching = true
     config.action_controller.enable_fragment_cache_logging = true
+    config.action_controller.page_cache_directory = Rails.public_path

Your PR does not explain why you are making this change, which affects all users not just docker users.

>  
-    config.cache_store = :memory_store
+    config.cache_store = :file_store, Rails.root.join("tmp/cache")

Why is a file cache better than a memory cache? You say it gives better performance but normally memory is faster than than something that is disk backed? Bearing in mind that this affects all users is the performance benefit in fact only when running under docker?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/3810#pullrequestreview-1187067432
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/3810/review/1187067432 at github.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/rails-dev/attachments/20221119/3272a16f/attachment.htm>