I have inherited a Read The Docs in-house installation (to see our internal git server), in which it was a known issue that the build volume would eventually run full. Now it has again and we would like to find the proper solution. We currently run in Openshift and to my understanding the build job runs "next to" the web server and communicate through shared volumes, including a build volume.
It appears that the problem is that old builds (notably Pull Requests) are not deleted but stay for ever on the build volume. I am not a Django programmer so I am unfamiliar with these kind of applications making the spelunking challenging.
Is this a simple setting about cleaning that my ex-colleague have missed, or where should I look in the sources? The last thing he did before leaving was upgrading to 6.0.
Related
I don't want to use berks in production because I don't like the idea of nodes going out to the web to pull cookbooks (I only want them to pull them from the Chef server in the normal way). But I like using Berks for local development because it resolves the dependencies for kitchen for me.
I was thinking about just adding berksfile and berksfile.lock to gitignore, but I figured I'd ask if it is possible to accomplish this with berks without removing it from production.
"nodes" will never go to the internet looking for cookbooks, they'll always be sourced from the chef server, so.... The question back is: how do you propose to deliver cookbooks to the chef server used to manage your production nodes?
What most people appear to do is commit the Berkshelf lock file and just run a "berks apply" against the target chef server. That will most likely fit your needs.
Personally, I like better separation between development and my production/non-production systems. I create a release tarball containing all the cookbooks that I've tested in development, using the "vendor" command in Berkshelf, and store this binary in a revision control system like Nexus. I suspect many would consider this over-kill, but it enables me to deliver an off-line (no internet connection required) and traceable delivery of my configuration.
We are looking for a way to use GitHub on an internal system that we are developing at work. We have developed it in PHP and MySQL, with a fair bit of jQuery/Ajax, on a Windows Server VM running IIS. Other staff can access the frontend over the network using the IP address.
There are currently three people working on it and at the moment we directly edit the file on the VM as we need it to still communicate with the database to check our changes have worked. There is no option to install anything like WAMP on our individual machines and there are the usual group policy restrictions so the only access we have to a database is via the VM. We have been working with copies of files/folders and the database but there is always the risk that then merging these would be a massive task.
I do use GitHub (mainly desktop but I can just about get by with using the command line as long as I have a list of the command in front of me) at home to sync between my PC and Laptop, via GitHub.com and believe that the issues we get with several people needing to update the same file would be eradicated by using it here at work.
However, there are some queries we need to ensure we have straight in our heads before putting forward a request.
Is what we are asking for viable? Can several branches on the same server be worked on at the same time or would this only work on an individual machine.
Given that our network is fairly restricted, is there any way that we can work on the files on our machine and connect to a VM hosted database? I believe that an IDE will allow us to run php files on a standard machine (although a request for Eclipse is now around 6 weeks old and there is still no confirmation that we will get it any time soon) but will this also allow .
The stuff we do is not overly sensitive but the company would certainly not want what we do out there in a public repository (and also would not be likely to pay for a premium GitHub account) so we would need to branch/pull/merge directly from our machines to the VM.
Does anyone have any advice/suggestions/solutions to this? Although GitHub would be a preferred option as I already use it, we are open to any suggestion that will allow three people, on different machines, simultaneously work on a central system while ensuring that we do not overwrite or affect each others stuff.
Setting up a git repo on Windows is not trivial and may require a fair bit of work. You can try using SVN it is fairly straight forward to install on windows and has a better learning curve than Git. I am not saying SVN is better/worse as compared to Git, it's much better suited to your needs. We have a similar setup and we use Tortoise SVN https://subversion.apache.org/ as a client. SVN also has branches and stuff.
SVN for server side repository https://subversion.apache.org/
If you would still prefer Git on windows, check this out - https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/step-guide-setup-secure-git-remote-repository-windows-nivedan-bamal
1) It is possible to work on many branches and then merge them into a single branch. That's the preferred Git development way. You can do the same on SVN.
So I've used PHPStorm before, and have been asked to evaluate it (along with some other coworkers) as I already had my own private license, for how effective it would be with my current company. Although I'm hitting a bit of a snag that I really dont think should be a show stopper.
Anyway, the way my company has its development environments setup now is a bit odd. We check everything into subversion, into different directories than what it will end up on the clients system because we save them to debian packages. This makes working with the files directly from subversion difficult, as PHPstorm has no idea where related files are located.
However, because of this, our files on our development virtual machines are not directly under subversion. Instead, we patch up our virtual machines by installing the updated packages when needed.
This makes life difficult for an IDE, which wants to keep a local copy of the files on your system. The best way I can figure out how to do this, is to run a synchronize between the remote server and local server (going by timestamp and size should be fine, and completes in less than a minute). It would be fine to tell developers "after you patch, make sure you sync with phpstorm".
However, the problem I'm having is, if I modify a file on the remote system, sync (and it says it downloaded) it takes several minutes after opening the file for the remote changes to be seen in phpstorm
I have no idea why this would be, and could potentially lead to really bad results if someone makes a few quick changes, saves, and overwrites the needed files.
I'm currently running phpstorm on Ubuntu 14.04 64-bit
Any help would be appreciated
Lately I have been looking into docker and the usefulness it can provide to a SaaS company. I have spent some time learning about how to containerize apps and learning briefly about what docker and containers are. I have some problems understanding the usefulness of this technology. I have watched some videos from dockercon and it seems like everyone is talking about how docker makes deployment easy and how you deploy in your dev environment is guaranteed to run in production. However, I have some questions:
Deploying containers directly to production from the dev environment means that developers should develop inside containers which are the same containers that will run on production. This is practically not possible because developers like to develop on their fancy MACs with IDEs. Developers will revolt if they are told to ssh into containers and develop their code inside. So how does that work in companies that currently use docker?
If we assume that the development workflow will not change. Developers will develop locally and push their code into a repo or something. So where is the "containerizing the app" fits within the workflow?
Also if developers do not develop within containers, then the "what you develop is what you deploy and is guaranteed to work" assumption is violated. If this is the case, then I can only see that the only benefit docker offers is isolation, which is the same thing virtualization offer, of course with a lower overhead. So my question here would be, is the low overhead the only advantage docker has on virtualization? or are other things I dont see?
You can write the code outside of a container and transfer it into the container in many different ways. Some examples include:
Code locally and include the source when you docker build by using an ADD or COPY statement as part of the Dockerfile
Code locally and push your code to a source code repository like GitHub and then have the build process pull the code into the container as part of docker build
Code locally and mount your local source code directory as a shared volume with the container.
The first two allow you to have exactly the same build process in production and development. The last example would not be suitable for production, but could be quickly converted to production with an ADD statement (i.e. the first example)
In the Docker workflow, Developers can create both source code (which gets stored and shared in a repository like git, mercurial, etc) and a ready-to-run container, which gets stored and shared via a repository like https://registry.hub.docker.com or a local registry.
The containerized running code that you develop and test is exactly what can go to production. That's one advantage. In addition you get isolation, interesting container-to-container networking, and tool integration with a growing class of devops tools for creating, maintaining and deploying containers.
To those of you that are trying to be good little developers and version control their ExpressionEngine sites with git, how do you handle your database?
In my limited experience with multiple developers working on one ExpressionEngine site, we've had to all run off of a single MySQL development database running on a remote web server. For those of you that have tried this, it is PAINFULLY slow. Page loads can easily take 5-10 seconds making development extremely difficult. It would be quicker to work off of a remote development server. I am trying to steer away from working off of a remote MySQL server in order to be able to work from anywhere and not depend on Internet connection speed/quality.
Just wondering how others handle their MySQL databases.
Do all of your developers run off of one central database? Have you dealt with slowness issues like we have?
Do you keep your database under version control? How do you handle export/imports among multiple developers and multiple branches?
With one developer I can import/export/commit the database very easily but as soon as you add another developer to the mix, it gets very VERY muddy. Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts on this mammoth topic.
Thanks!
It seems there is a lot of time lost on failing DNS requests, with a remote database.
Start your MySQL server with start mysqld with --skip-name-resolve. (More information on this topic can be found here: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/host-cache.html)
Having a remote database still seems to be the best way for us to work on a project with multiple developers.
I almost always use a central database for development. Depending which host you use, the speed difference may not be huge.
Obviously, if you're not making changes to the database, i.e. only doing template development, keeping the database in sync is not as needed, so you could potentially bring up a local copy of the database. You just have to remember to repeat any database changes, if you do end up making some.
As far as version control, I keep a copy of my base EE install's SQL file in my base repository. Other than that I don't usually keep copies of the database in Git, so I don't do a lot of importing/exporting, etc.
Have you looked at the EE Profiler recently? You'll probably notice in the neighborhood of 20-80 queries on your home page depending on it's complexity.
The problem is that, for each query, MySQL must execute a remote request for data, download the response, and then present ExpressionEngine it's data. The 20-80 round trips to the database is what's causing your delay and I don't think there is much you can do about it. When using a remote (outside our network) database, I get the same delay as you.
When MySQL is running on your machine or the production server, it doesn't have the added network requests causing latency in it's requests for data. This is the difference.
As for fixes, all you can do is move to a database hosted on your internal network. We have a Linux machine that mimics our production environment that we use for staging. Since it's on our network, we can use the local IP address in our database.php file. This is much faster.
The problem that we still have is the issue of channels/fields/entries. When a developer is working on a new section, they'll likely need to create a new channel and fields and/or new entries. When we're ready to push that functionality to production, we have to manually make those changes on the production server as there is no way to reliably export them. I am hopeful of this addon though---we'll see.
In my company (4 developers) we each run our own DB locally. But recently I tested Rackspace Cloud Databases (but there are other cloud db providers) for a heavy DB that could become difficult to run on a little laptop. It's relatively less expensive than running our own db server, and it can be setup or deleted in the minute.