I've been using this extension but plan to change to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure as you've suggested. I also plan to update the current version of Umbraco from 7.2.8 to 7.3.4. The question is: Should I update Umbraco first, or should I switch to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure first?
If I update Umbraco first, my concern is whether or not this plugin will stay compatible with Umbraco 7.3.4 until I migrate to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure. If I switch to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure first, my concern is if UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure plays well with Umbraco 7.2.8 until I upgrade to 7.3.4.
UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure definitely works with v7.2.8 I actually built it against v6.2.5 so it will work as far back as that.
My only concern switching over would be dealing with existing media. With this plugin the media is stored using the absolute url that includes the host. With UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure media is stored using a relative path by default.
To switch over you will have to go through your database and replace the absolute urls with their relative equivalent.
Hey there, thanks for the reply! Let's say I were to port to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure on top of umbraco 7.2.8. What if I then needed to combine it with ImageProcessor as stated here:
That would mean I'd have to update ImageProcessor to be higher (4.3.2+) than the one that came with umbraco 7.2.8 (3.3.1.0). There have been breaking changes between ImageProcessor 3.3.10 and 4.3.2+.
I suppose my general concern is the above (possible) dependency issues? I have a similar concern for if I were to install the AzureBlobCache plugin, which requires ImageProcessor 4.2.0+.
There are breaking changes (being a major version jump) but mostly to the configuration files which are an optional download; upgrading should be fairly painless. I was very careful to ensure that as much stuff as possible worked as normal - that's why the guys at Umbraco allowed a major version jump (something they very rarely do).
I would back everything up then do the upgrade. It should go smoothly. If you have any issues though raise them on this thread and I will do my very best to help you.
Hello James! thanks a bunch for your help thus far. I was able to (mostly successfully) implement the the Umbracofilesystems.Azure plugin on Umbraco 7.3.5. I even did not have to go through the database and change the existing urls yet, since A) the backoffice still uses the absolute blob urls, and B) on the front end, I simply do a string replace to create relative url img src attributes.
My only issue so far is backoffice urls for newly uploaded images. I have the same issue here (I've included an anchor to my particular comment):
EDIT:
I just realized what needs to happen. Several items need to have the same name. "media_projectname" can be anything, but it must be the same in all of the below locations:
Advice on Umbraco 7.3 with this extension
Hello,
I've been using this extension but plan to change to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure as you've suggested. I also plan to update the current version of Umbraco from 7.2.8 to 7.3.4. The question is: Should I update Umbraco first, or should I switch to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure first?
If I update Umbraco first, my concern is whether or not this plugin will stay compatible with Umbraco 7.3.4 until I migrate to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure. If I switch to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure first, my concern is if UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure plays well with Umbraco 7.2.8 until I upgrade to 7.3.4.
Thanks a bunch!
Hi Shola,
UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure definitely works with v7.2.8 I actually built it against v6.2.5 so it will work as far back as that.
My only concern switching over would be dealing with existing media. With this plugin the media is stored using the absolute url that includes the host. With UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure media is stored using a relative path by default.
To switch over you will have to go through your database and replace the absolute urls with their relative equivalent.
Cheers
James
Hey there, thanks for the reply! Let's say I were to port to UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure on top of umbraco 7.2.8. What if I then needed to combine it with ImageProcessor as stated here:
https://github.com/JimBobSquarePants/UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure#combining-with-imageprocessor
That would mean I'd have to update ImageProcessor to be higher (4.3.2+) than the one that came with umbraco 7.2.8 (3.3.1.0). There have been breaking changes between ImageProcessor 3.3.10 and 4.3.2+.
I suppose my general concern is the above (possible) dependency issues? I have a similar concern for if I were to install the AzureBlobCache plugin, which requires ImageProcessor 4.2.0+.
Thank you, Shola
Hi Shola,
There are breaking changes (being a major version jump) but mostly to the configuration files which are an optional download; upgrading should be fairly painless. I was very careful to ensure that as much stuff as possible worked as normal - that's why the guys at Umbraco allowed a major version jump (something they very rarely do).
I would back everything up then do the upgrade. It should go smoothly. If you have any issues though raise them on this thread and I will do my very best to help you.
Cheers
James
Hello James! thanks a bunch for your help thus far. I was able to (mostly successfully) implement the the Umbracofilesystems.Azure plugin on Umbraco 7.3.5. I even did not have to go through the database and change the existing urls yet, since A) the backoffice still uses the absolute blob urls, and B) on the front end, I simply do a string replace to create relative url img src attributes.
My only issue so far is backoffice urls for newly uploaded images. I have the same issue here (I've included an anchor to my particular comment):
https://github.com/JimBobSquarePants/UmbracoFileSystemProviders.Azure/issues/18#issuecomment-176322823
Have you come across that before?
EDIT: I just realized what needs to happen. Several items need to have the same name. "media_projectname" can be anything, but it must be the same in all of the below locations:
<add key="containerName" value="**media_projectname**" />However, the Provider alias is still exactly "media".<setting key="SourceBlobContainer" value="**media_projectname**" /><service prefix="**media_projectname**" ...Also,<setting key="Host" value="http://<account>.blob.core.windows.net/**media_projectname**/" /><location path="**media_projectname**"> <system.webServer> <handlers> <remove name="StaticFileHandler" /> <add name="StaticFileHandler" path="*" verb="*" preCondition="integratedMode" type="System.Web.StaticFileHandler" /> </handlers> </system.webServer> </location>(Obviously, remove any double asterisks you might see above)The only issue I have left is for pdfs. Visiting "/media_projectname/2059/example.pdf" returns a 404.
Nevermind I solved it here :) Thanks again!
is working on a reply...