Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Auto-configure S3 TransferManager #300

Closed
maciejwalkowiak opened this issue Apr 7, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed

Auto-configure S3 TransferManager #300

maciejwalkowiak opened this issue Apr 7, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
component: s3 S3 integration related issue status: ideal-for-contribution We agree it's nice to have but it is not team priority type: enhancement Smaller enhancement in existing integration
Milestone
3.0.0 M1

Comments

@maciejwalkowiak
Copy link
Contributor

Transfer Manager for SDK v2 is available in preview. We should add auto-configuration entry for it, that will be triggered only if TransferManager is in the classpath. Docs should include note that TransferManager is in preview.

Additionally, transfer manager compatible S3OutputStream implementation including S3OutputStreamProvider should be added.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/developer/introducing-amazon-s3-transfer-manager-in-the-aws-sdk-for-java-2-x/
@maciejwalkowiak maciejwalkowiak added component: s3 S3 integration related issue type: enhancement Smaller enhancement in existing integration labels Apr 7, 2022
@maciejwalkowiak maciejwalkowiak added this to the 3.x milestone Apr 7, 2022
@maciejwalkowiak maciejwalkowiak added the status: ideal-for-contribution We agree it's nice to have but it is not team priority label Apr 7, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot added the status: waiting-for-triage Team has not yet looked into this issue label Apr 7, 2022
@maciejwalkowiak maciejwalkowiak removed the status: waiting-for-triage Team has not yet looked into this issue label Apr 7, 2022
@krimsz
Copy link
Contributor

krimsz commented Apr 30, 2022

Hey @maciejwalkowiak I think I can help on this one, already did some development on my side to test the waters and it does not seem very complex.
I do have a question, for the S3OutputStream implementation it looks like we need 99% of the code since we also would need to create a temporary file on disk, if this is the case, is it ok if I change the existing code a bit? This would be to prevent too much code duplication between the existing and the new classes

@maciejwalkowiak
Copy link
Contributor Author

@krimsz yes, definitely it makes sense to not duplicate this piece of code.

@krimsz krimsz mentioned this issue May 1, 2022
Merged
9 tasks
@maciejwalkowiak maciejwalkowiak modified the milestones: 3.x, 3.0.0 M1 May 4, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
component: s3 S3 integration related issue status: ideal-for-contribution We agree it's nice to have but it is not team priority type: enhancement Smaller enhancement in existing integration
Projects
None yet
Milestone
3.0.0 M1
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@maciejwalkowiak @krimsz