Hi Jason, Thanks for your advice. These solutions appear to be the most relevant for our usecase, for now.
We just wonder also if it will be addressed in upcoming version of Dubbo, to support InputStream in the public APIs? Since we believe that InputStream itself is a complete and efficient interface for transferring large series of data, and we don't think that one can make it equivalent, let alone makeing it better by re-implementing the functionality of the InputStream (splitting the large files and transfer piece by piece) As far as we know, Dubbo version 3.x will come with reactive stream supported. So whether the InputStream can be also supported in this version? Best Tien Dat On 2019/07/19 01:07:51, Jason Joo <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, Tien > > You can only use serializable types as parameters in API definition and maybe > you cannot do that. > > You can choose an alternative design like: > 1. use byte[] (When the size of file is small) (If it's large or undetermined > splitting it into pieces will also work) > 2. use a place to store temporarily and then use the address (like url) to > identify it. > > best regards, > > Jason > > > On Jul 18, 2019, at 19:18, [email protected] wrote: > > > > Dear experts > > > > We are newbie with Dubbo. > > What we are trying to do is providing a public API that supports uploading > > the content of a file. > > As a result, the API method has a parameter as FileInputStream. > > > > However, the dubbo protocol does not support Streaming. > > > > Do you know how we can implement our API with Dubbo? > > > > Best > > Tien Dat > >
