A client has a website running on Heroku and files are stored on Amazon S3.
The sitemap map is set up on URL: website.com/sitemap.xml -> after entering this URL address into browser is made redirect to http://s3.amazonaws.com/bucket/sitemap.xml. The XML has like 30MB.
But now the client wants to display the XML file straight on website.com/sitemap.xml, no redirect to Amazon S3.
If I asked his why, he wrote me "because it requires Google Webmasters".
I would like to ask you, if there is any way to display the content of sitemap.xml straight on website.com/sitemap.xml... or, if there is any way to solve this.
Thank you, have a nice day!
So for now i don't see any option but download sitemap.xml from s3 and then render it in your application.
use net/http do download the page.
Related
I have a RoR web app that allow users upload images and use Cloudinary as cloud storage. I read their document and find a cool way called "direct uploading" which reduce my server's loading. To my knowledge, the spirit is changing workflow
image -> server -> Cloudinary
to
image -> Cloudinary
and my server only store an Cloudinary url to database, not the image file (Tell me if I'm wrong, thx).
So my question is, how to check whether I have changed to "direct uploading" method successfully? Open element inspector to see time cost for each POST and GET requests? Other better options?
I expect big advances via this way, but how can I feel it?
Thanks form a rookie =)
# The app is deployed on heroku.
# Doesn't change to direct uploading method yet.
# This app is private, only serve for around 10 people.
You can indeed (and it is very recommended to) bypass your server and let Cloudinary take care of the upload processing directly. This indeed lowers the processing of your server to simply store the uploaded image's details, and the image is directly stored in your Cloudinary account. This indeed quickens the upload process. You can test out the sample project which demonstrates both server-side and client-side uploads.
I'm writing a toy application to get acquainted with AngularJS. This application has a Rails backend.
I don't know how to make the client side angularjs app, deal with a PDF that the backend sends when hitting a particular URL (http://localhost:3000/contacts.pdf)
When typing the above mentioned URL straight in the browser, the server replies with a PDF and the browser asks what to do with it (download or open).
When the same thing is done via the angularjs app, I can see the file gets returned in the response. And that's where I'm stuck at.
How can I replicate the same behaviour within client side app?
Thanks for your help
One way is just use an anchor tag in HTML and put the link as a controller variable ie. Download and in controller put $scope.link = "http://localhost..."; (or array if requiring multiple links).
If this is not what you want, please add further clarification.
Given an Amazon S3 URL, or any URL that is a direct URL to a file. In my controller, given this URL, I want to send the user the file, whatever it is w/o redirecting.
Is this possible?
If I understand your question correctly, I don't think that's possible from your end. That's why many sites say "right click to save" or something along those lines. Some sites even have links to videos that say "click to download" but when I click the link they start streaming. These are due to MY settings (ie. the settings on the user's client). You can't control that.
If what you're trying to do is HIDE the location of a file...
Send files back to the user - Usually,
static files can be retrieved by using
the direct URL and circumventing your
Rails application. In some situations,
however, it can be useful to hide the
true location of files, particularly
if you're sending something of value
(e-books, for example). It may be
essential to only send files to logged
in users too. send_file makes it
possible. It sends files in 4096 byte
chunks, so even large files can be
sent without slowing the system down.
From an old blog post
I would like to know if Google App Engine can be used as a Content delivery network like aws S3. I'm running a RoR app on Heroku and I would like store my uploaded files on GAE instead of s3.
If it's possible what would be the best way to do it?
http://24ways.org/2008/using-google-app-engine-as-your-own-cdn
It won't be able to host files over 1MB though.
Make sure to read through the comments on that blog post as well, some have concerns about the terms of service.
GAE in itself isn't meant to be a CDN... that doesn't, however, stop you from writing a CDN application on top of it. The only limit you'll need to worry about is the 50 MB limit on the size of the blobstore. Such an app will have to provide a URL that you can hit to get the upload URL, which could then be used to upload the file. The download url can also be generated with the upload URL, and used to access the content.
Can one of the Amazon services (their S3 data service, or otherwise) be used to offload server of static files for a Ruby on Rails app, but still support the app's authentication & authorization?
That is such that when the user browser downloaded the initial HTML for one page of the Ruby on Rails application, when it went back for static content (e.g. an image or CSS file), that this request would be:
(a) routed directly to the Amazon service (no RoR cycles used to serve it, or bandwidth), BUT
(b) the browser request for this item (e.g. an image) would still have to go through an authentication/authorization layer based on the user model in the Ruby on Rails application - in other words to ensure not just anyone could get the image...
thanks
The answer is a yes with a but. You can use a feature of S3 that allows you to create links to secure S3 objects that has a small time to live, default is 5 minutes. This will work for any S3 object that is uploaded as private. This means that the browser will only have X seconds or whatever to request the file from S3. Example code from docs for the AWS gem:
S3Object.url_for('beluga_baby.jpg', 'marcel_molina')
You can also specify an expires_in or expires option per file. The bad thing is that you would need to create a helper for your stylesheet, image, and js links to create the proper S3 URLs.
I would recommend that you setup a domain name for your S3 bucket, like "examples3.amazonaws.com" and put all your standard image files and CSS there as public. Then set that as the asset host in your rails config. Then, only use the secure links for static files that really need it.