Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-jackrabbit-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 88847 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2005 21:34:16 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 25 Aug 2005 21:34:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 63402 invoked by uid 500); 25 Aug 2005 21:34:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jackrabbit-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: jackrabbit-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list jackrabbit-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 63389 invoked by uid 99); 25 Aug 2005 21:34:15 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:34:15 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [213.185.42.161] (HELO grotti.greywolves.org) (213.185.42.161) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:34:31 -0700 Received: (qmail 23137 invoked by uid 103); 25 Aug 2005 21:34:09 -0000 Received: from ip213-185-42-165.laajakaista.mtv3.fi (HELO [213.185.42.165]) (213.185.42.165) by grotti.greywolves.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Aug 2005 00:34:07 +0300 Message-ID: <430E394E.4090607@zitting.name> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 00:34:06 +0300 From: Jukka Zitting User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-1.3.3 (X11/20050513) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jackrabbit-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: uploading large streams References: <1124974332.430dbefcb60e3@webmail2.kuleuven.be> <430DC31D.1080204@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <430DC31D.1080204@gmx.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi, Marcel Reutegger wrote: > not sure, but it seems that the RMI implementation of a binary value > reads the data into memory. > [...] > maybe Jukka can shed some light on this. Yes, that's true. The current implementation just slurps the entire binary stream into memory and passes it over the network as a one big byte array. The reason for this is simplicity and minimum amount of network roundtrips, but the downside is the obvious limit on stream sizes. A buffered "RemoteInputStream" is probably the best solution to this problem. I'll take a look at this tomorrow. BR, Jukka Zitting