Re: [squeak-dev] [Q] File Upload/Download Server, Comanche or Swazoo

["S.J.Chun"]

Hi,

We already have apache + perl + rails server for this. What I'm currently trying
to implement using Squeak is for desktop PC users so that they also can host
these kind of service if they want(without paying fee :-) for small number of
people. Why I choose Squeak is that it would make me easy to create simple
installable package(I have experience on similar thing - web app - using Squeak).

So, what you mean is that Squeak cannot handle > 4GB or 2 GB sized file because
it cannot address them, right? If this is true especially on Windows, I have to find other
simple platform, Sigh T_T

As I said before, I cannot use apache or other full scale web server. I might have to
use old dirty C to create dedicated server...

Thank you for your help.

----- Original Message -----
   From: Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall@...>
   To: ""S.J.Chun"" <chunsj@...>, Seaside - general discussion <seaside@...>
   Sent: 08-07-23 15:01:12
   Subject: Re: Re: [squeak-dev] [Q] File Upload/Download Server, Comanche or Swazoo

  2008/7/23 "S.J.Chun" <chunsj@...>:
> Hmm,
>
> it seems that with current Seaside(I'm using 2.8) large file upload mught be hard
> task.
>
> And for file size, not all files have that size.(Sorry for my poor english) But some of
> the files will have that size.

10 GB is massive. There are whole lot of 32bit integers that can
overflow and a lot of other things that can go wrong at any stage
including the browser and Apache.

> My current idea is that I should create module(?) for Comanche or Swazoo for File
> Upload (this just process multipart/form request for file upload with additional
> parameters) and small web application or module for processing download url.(This
> might be possible with Seaside with RESTable URL support or simple module).

I only tried the upload streaming for Kom on localhost. While it could
handle largish files (40 MB) it wasn't able to get close to 400 MB. So
Kom might not be your tool. I have not seen an upload streaming API
for Swazoo (which doesn't mean it's not there). Squeak might not be
the best tool for the job where. HTTP might not be as well.

For the download I would simply set a X-Sendfile header and let Apache
handle it.

Cheers
Philippe


_______________________________________________
seaside mailing list
seaside@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

[Philippe Marschall]

2008/7/23 "S.J.Chun" <chunsj@...>:

> Hi,
>
> We already have apache + perl + rails server for this. What I'm currently trying
> to implement using Squeak is for desktop PC users so that they also can host
> these kind of service if they want(without paying fee :-) for small number of
> people. Why I choose Squeak is that it would make me easy to create simple
> installable package(I have experience on similar thing - web app - using Squeak).
>
> So, what you mean is that Squeak cannot handle > 4GB or 2 GB sized file because
> it cannot address them, right? If this is true especially on Windows, I have to find other
> simple platform, Sigh T_T

No, what I say is, there are a lot more parts involved here than
Squeak and they all can blow up.

Cheers
Philippe

> As I said before, I cannot use apache or other full scale web server. I might have to
> use old dirty C to create dedicated server...
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall@...>
>   To: ""S.J.Chun"" <chunsj@...>, Seaside - general discussion <seaside@...>
>   Sent: 08-07-23 15:01:12
>   Subject: Re: Re: [squeak-dev] [Q] File Upload/Download Server, Comanche or Swazoo
>
>  2008/7/23 "S.J.Chun" <chunsj@...>:
>> Hmm,
>>
>> it seems that with current Seaside(I'm using 2.8) large file upload mught be hard
>> task.
>>
>> And for file size, not all files have that size.(Sorry for my poor english) But some of
>> the files will have that size.
>
> 10 GB is massive. There are whole lot of 32bit integers that can
> overflow and a lot of other things that can go wrong at any stage
> including the browser and Apache.
>
>> My current idea is that I should create module(?) for Comanche or Swazoo for File
>> Upload (this just process multipart/form request for file upload with additional
>> parameters) and small web application or module for processing download url.(This
>> might be possible with Seaside with RESTable URL support or simple module).
>
> I only tried the upload streaming for Kom on localhost. While it could
> handle largish files (40 MB) it wasn't able to get close to 400 MB. So
> Kom might not be your tool. I have not seen an upload streaming API
> for Swazoo (which doesn't mean it's not there). Squeak might not be
> the best tool for the job where. HTTP might not be as well.
>
> For the download I would simply set a X-Sendfile header and let Apache
> handle it.
>
> Cheers
> Philippe
>
>

_______________________________________________
seaside mailing list
seaside@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

["S.J.Chun"]

Thnk you for your kind answer. I'll try as much as I can and if
something interesting happens :-) I'll let you know.

Thank you again.

----- Original Message -----
   From: Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall@...>
   To: ""S.J.Chun"" <chunsj@...>, Seaside - general discussion <seaside@...>
   Sent: 08-07-23 15:39:46
   Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] [Q] File Upload/Download Server, Comanche or Swazoo

  2008/7/23 "S.J.Chun" <chunsj@...>:

> Hi,
>
> We already have apache + perl + rails server for this. What I'm currently trying
> to implement using Squeak is for desktop PC users so that they also can host
> these kind of service if they want(without paying fee :-) for small number of
> people. Why I choose Squeak is that it would make me easy to create simple
> installable package(I have experience on similar thing - web app - using Squeak).
>
> So, what you mean is that Squeak cannot handle > 4GB or 2 GB sized file because
> it cannot address them, right? If this is true especially on Windows, I have to find other
> simple platform, Sigh T_T

No, what I say is, there are a lot more parts involved here than
Squeak and they all can blow up.

Cheers
Philippe

> As I said before, I cannot use apache or other full scale web server. I might have to
> use old dirty C to create dedicated server...
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Philippe Marschall <philippe.marschall@...>
>   To: ""S.J.Chun"" <chunsj@...>, Seaside - general discussion <seaside@...>
>   Sent: 08-07-23 15:01:12
>   Subject: Re: Re: [squeak-dev] [Q] File Upload/Download Server, Comanche or Swazoo
>
>  2008/7/23 "S.J.Chun" <chunsj@...>:
>> Hmm,
>>
>> it seems that with current Seaside(I'm using 2.8) large file upload mught be hard
>> task.
>>
>> And for file size, not all files have that size.(Sorry for my poor english) But some of
>> the files will have that size.
>
> 10 GB is massive. There are whole lot of 32bit integers that can
> overflow and a lot of other things that can go wrong at any stage
> including the browser and Apache.
>
>> My current idea is that I should create module(?) for Comanche or Swazoo for File
>> Upload (this just process multipart/form request for file upload with additional
>> parameters) and small web application or module for processing download url.(This
>> might be possible with Seaside with RESTable URL support or simple module).
>
> I only tried the upload streaming for Kom on localhost. While it could
> handle largish files (40 MB) it wasn't able to get close to 400 MB. So
> Kom might not be your tool. I have not seen an upload streaming API
> for Swazoo (which doesn't mean it's not there). Squeak might not be
> the best tool for the job where. HTTP might not be as well.
>
> For the download I would simply set a X-Sendfile header and let Apache
> handle it.
>
> Cheers
> Philippe
>
>

_______________________________________________
seaside mailing list
seaside@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside