I tried with curl, but it's a pain to get the response back into the
command line so I tried it with a python script instead and I got the same
zero byte file on the core.

Everything in the communication seems to be correct and the api returns
200-OK

https://gist.github.com/4694588


On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Greg Logan <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 13-01-30 09:06 AM, Shane Phelan wrote:
> >
> > I'm checking out the HTTP ingest.  Using the rest documentation I did
> > createMediaPackage first and then when using the REST documentation to
> > addTrack the file that gets created on the server is 0 bytes.  The
> > response was 200-OK.  Here's the info from Wireshark.
> >  https://gist.github.com/4674044
>
> Hrm, that looks right to me.  Have you tried with with curl or wget?
> There might be a bug in the docs code itself.
>
> > The only thing weird that I see is the duration is set to 0, but
> > according to the documentation duration isn't required.  Would a
> > duration of 0 cause the file uploaded to be 0 bytes?
>
> Nope, this isn't set by some of the other CAs, so I highly doubt it
> could break things like that.
>
> G
>
> > The file should be getting uploaded at the time addTrack is called
> correct?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Shane
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Greg Logan <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     Someone brought this to me off list, and I figured I should put it
> up on
> >     the main list too just in case someone else has the same question:
> >
> >     > I'm doing some research on the Matterhorn capture agent and I was
> >     using
> >     > your Capture Agent wiki page as a reference
> >     >
> >
> http://opencast.jira.com/wiki/display/MH/Capture+Agent+Communication+Protocols
> >     >
> >     > One of the things you mentioned is that the HTTP ingest method is
> the
> >     > better method and is encouraged to be used over the zip method,
> >     but the
> >     > reference capture agent still uses the zip upload.  (Unless it was
> >     > changed in 1.4)
> >     >
> >     > My question then is that statement still valid?  Would you still
> >     use the
> >     > HTTP ingest method over the zip ingest method.
> >
> >     Yes, for sure.  The reason we have not removed the zip-based ingest
> >     method is because some thirdparty CAs depend on it, and because no
> one
> >     has had time to remove it yet from the reference CA.
> >
> >     The issue with the zip-based ingest is that the CA has to spend a
> bunch
> >     of time packaging potentially 10s of GBs of data, and then (more
> >     importantly) the core has to unpackage it!  This takes a while, and
> has
> >     been known to reduce some storage configurations to smoking ruin.  It
> >     also has a bad habit of taking longer than many (proxy) systems are
> >     comfortable with, which leads to problems like
> >     http://opencast.jira.com/browse/MH-8884.
> >
> >     G
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Matterhorn-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn-users
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Matterhorn-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
Matterhorn-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn-users

Reply via email to