IStorage is a highlight level than IStream, might you want to base it there instead ? On 13 Jun 2015 3:51 pm, "Greg Keogh" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Folks, I had a dream this morning about an implementation of the abstract > Stream > <https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.io.stream(v=vs.100).aspx> > class that uses the *cloud *as the backing storage. Imagine just being > able to replace FileStream > <https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.io.filestream(v=vs.100).aspx> > in your code with a mythical "CloudStream" and it all works much the same. > Due to implementation differences of the different providers, you would > probably really need an AzureBlobStream, a CloudFilesStream, an > AmazonSimpleStorageStream, etc, because some of the low-level APIs support > seeking and reading chunks at offsets, some don't, and there are many other > subtle differences. > > Once I realised the low-level features of these providers are primitive > and difficult to abstract, my dream of quickly knocking-up a "CloudStream" > class faded away. Does anyone know if this issue has been tackled by others > with vaguely useful results? > > Yes, I know performance would be a serious issue and you'd need async > support. Maybe memory mapped files > <https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.io.memorymappedfiles(v=vs.110).aspx> > might be useful?! > > *Greg K* >
