nizhikov commented on code in PR #11518:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/11518#discussion_r1810643540
##########
modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/binary/BinaryWriterExImpl.java:
##########
@@ -1880,6 +1892,72 @@ public void writeFieldIdNoSchemaUpdate(int fieldId) {
fieldCnt++;
}
+ /**
+ * Write byte array from the InputStream with the specified length.
+ *
+ * @param in InputStream.
+ * @param len Length of data in the stream.
+ * @return Number of bytes written.
+ */
+ public int writeByteArrayFromInputStream(InputStream in, int len) throws
IOException {
+ out.unsafeEnsure(1 + 4 + len);
+
+ return doWriteByteArrayFromInputStream(in, len);
+ }
+
+ /**
+ * Write byte array from the InputStream with uknown length.
+ *
+ * @param in InputStream.
+ * @return Number of bytes written or -1 if stream contains more than
{@code MAX_ARRAY_SIZE} bytes.
+ */
+ public int writeByteArrayFromInputStream(InputStream in) throws
IOException {
+ out.unsafeEnsure(1 + 4);
+
+ int writtenLen = doWriteByteArrayFromInputStream(in, MAX_ARRAY_SIZE);
+
+ if (writtenLen == MAX_ARRAY_SIZE && in.read() != -1)
Review Comment:
> Generally any call to InputStream in all other new stream-related methods
can block as well.
Why do we need to read extra byte here, in the first place?
My point is that `in.read() != -1` are useless here.
I think we must handle "too much data" case differently - throw from the
`doWriteByteArrayFromInputStream` maybe?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
