Welcome Guest! You need to login or register to make posts.

Notification

Icon
Error

2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Kev3232  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, March 08, 2005 5:15:00 AM(UTC)
Kev3232

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 3/8/2005(UTC)
Posts: 15

There is an issue that we have noticed through all versions of Image Uploader. The amount of bandwidth used by the component to upload is generally far less than the available bandwidth of the user. We created a similar component to Image Uploader in Java because we needed something for OS X. The upload speed for the same file in the same way is far superior.

Is there a restriction or problem with bandwidth usage when uploading files because of the POST format with Image Uploader?

As a better example, we have a T3 in two different locations. Using the Java component I get bandwidth usage of about 450KB/sec between T3's. Using Image Uploader I generally get 40KB/sec.

Thanks.
Kev3232  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, March 08, 2005 12:42:00 PM(UTC)
Kev3232

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 3/8/2005(UTC)
Posts: 15

I wanted to clarify our setup. For uploading, the Image Uploader does not use a relative or absolute path. Our param for Action is similar to the following:

<PARAM NAME="Action" VALUE='http://server.domain.com'>


where server.domain.com is some other server devoted to accepting uploads (it is not part of the site where Image Uploader is presented).

Could the problem possibly be that the path is not local to the website? Or could there be a DNS lookup that is slowing this down? Would an IP address work better?

Thanks.

Edited by user Wednesday, February 20, 2008 5:06:30 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Fedor  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, March 08, 2005 1:38:00 PM(UTC)
Fedor

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,481

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 40 time(s) in 39 post(s)
Could the problem possibly be that the path is not local to the website? Or could there be a DNS lookup that is slowing this down? Would an IP address work better?

I don't think it is the reason as there is need in DNS lookup only once. We are checking the possible reason now.
Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
Kev3232  
#4 Posted : Sunday, March 13, 2005 4:02:00 AM(UTC)
Kev3232

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 3/8/2005(UTC)
Posts: 15

Any luck finding the problem with this, or any other suggestions?

Thanks.
Fedor  
#5 Posted : Sunday, March 13, 2005 4:32:00 PM(UTC)
Fedor

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,481

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 40 time(s) in 39 post(s)
Hello,

The reason of problem is in small buffer size during file transfer. We are working over it now and the fix will be included in Image Uploader 3.5.
Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
Fedor  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, March 23, 2005 9:31:00 PM(UTC)
Fedor

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,481

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 40 time(s) in 39 post(s)
This problem was described in Microsoft Knowledge Base: under Q329781.

Unfortunetely in Image Uploader 3.5 we have not resolved this problem.

Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
Kev3232  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, March 23, 2005 11:17:00 PM(UTC)
Kev3232

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 3/8/2005(UTC)
Posts: 15

Does the new Java component have the same limitation?
Fedor  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, March 23, 2005 11:41:00 PM(UTC)
Fedor

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,481

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 40 time(s) in 39 post(s)
It seems Java component has not this limitation. ActiveX version use Internet Explorer transport level (in order to have the same context), that's why there is such problem. However we will continue to discover the workaround.
Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
Younky Hong  
#9 Posted : Wednesday, March 29, 2006 6:28:36 PM(UTC)
Younky Hong

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 2/5/2006(UTC)
Posts: 1

Did you complete the job concerning the problem of small buffer size during file transfer ?

I want to set the property of "SocketSendBufferLength" during file transfer.



Quote:
Fedor (3/24/2005)
It seems Java component has not this limitation. ActiveX version use Internet Explorer transport level (in order to have the same context), that's why there is such problem. However we will continue to discover the workaround.




Alex Makhov  
#10 Posted : Wednesday, April 05, 2006 12:43:23 PM(UTC)
Alex Makhov

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 8/3/2003(UTC)
Posts: 998

Hello,

We have checked the ability to make the upload process faster, but there is too much code is to be written to implement this feature so fast upload feature has been moved to the far future plans.
Sincerely yours,
Alex Makhov

UserPostedImage Follow Aurigma on Twitter!
alanfox70  
#11 Posted : Tuesday, May 09, 2006 10:38:47 PM(UTC)
alanfox70

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 6/16/2005(UTC)
Posts: 36

Alex,

Is it possible to have this increase of speed implemented as a custom job? If so, can you email me a quote for it to praxis@myeorganizer.com

Thank you,

A.
Alex Makhov  
#12 Posted : Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:22:33 PM(UTC)
Alex Makhov

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 8/3/2003(UTC)
Posts: 998

Hello,

Quote:
Is it possible to have this increase of speed implemented as a custom job?


I think, yes, it is possible but it would take a lot of time (at least three weeks).
So if you are ready for it feel free to write to sales@aurigma.com.
Sincerely yours,
Alex Makhov

UserPostedImage Follow Aurigma on Twitter!
Fedor  
#13 Posted : Sunday, August 06, 2006 6:55:50 PM(UTC)
Fedor

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,481

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 40 time(s) in 39 post(s)
We plan to release Image Uploader 4.1 in August 2006 with improved upload speed.

It will support WinInet based upload and so way solves the problem with small buffer size in Internet Explorer.
Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
clickimage  
#14 Posted : Wednesday, August 09, 2006 6:23:10 PM(UTC)
clickimage

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 10/19/2005(UTC)
Posts: 27

We are currently using 3.5 with the dundas ASP uploader and experience slow uploading speeds. Is it possible that the ASP uploader component chosen can have an effect on the speed of the upload transfers? If so, does anyone know which ASP uploader would be the fastest?

Thanks for your reply!
Alex Makhov  
#15 Posted : Wednesday, August 09, 2006 7:59:41 PM(UTC)
Alex Makhov

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 8/3/2003(UTC)
Posts: 998

Hello,

The main reason of general slow upload speed is client ActiveX control upload speed.

If you still believe the problem is in ASP script efficiency, try to upload data with Java version, which uploads data much faster now. The new version of ActiveX version will upload data even faster than Java one.
Sincerely yours,
Alex Makhov

UserPostedImage Follow Aurigma on Twitter!
clickimage  
#16 Posted : Thursday, August 10, 2006 7:56:34 AM(UTC)
clickimage

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 10/19/2005(UTC)
Posts: 27

Hi,

Thanks for your quick reply. I uploaded a 3MB image in both the java and activeX versions and the java version was 30 seconds whereas the activex was about 15 seconds. Java is slower than ActiveX? Here is a link to a test page I created to test upload. It uploads images with both activeX and java automatically depending on if you use IE or firefox. Note: since the page is only created to test upload, you won't see anything happen after the upload is complete, it's only meant to view the uploading time.

http://www.clickimage.com/events/testupload.asp#

Most of our customers use IE, but firefox(which uses java) is gaining in popularity. I'm completely open to changing from dundas to another asp upload component if I knew it would help in performance. And, I'll definately be upgrading to 4.1. Do you know the exact GA date? One other question. Does the image uploader support an ASP upload component where I can extract EXIF and IPTC data after the upload is complete?
Alex Makhov  
#17 Posted : Thursday, August 10, 2006 1:21:42 PM(UTC)
Alex Makhov

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 8/3/2003(UTC)
Posts: 998

Hello,

We have checked your site. Current version of Image Uploader for Java uploads data much faster because its Progress event is called not as often as it was in the version 1.1.02. You could try to update to Image Uploader for Java 2.0 to check its fast upload.

As about your IPTC/EXIF question, feel free to read about the following properties: ExtractExif and ExtractIptc.

Edited by user Wednesday, February 20, 2008 5:07:31 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Sincerely yours,
Alex Makhov

UserPostedImage Follow Aurigma on Twitter!
clickimage  
#18 Posted : Wednesday, August 16, 2006 3:17:05 PM(UTC)
clickimage

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 10/19/2005(UTC)
Posts: 27

Hello Alex. I'm going to wait until our migration to 4.1 before uploading the Java. I'm assuming that moving to the "DUAL" uploader that after uploading to 4.1 I'll have the right java version which has fast upload. Can you reference me to a page or something that I can monitor on when the 4.1 version will be available ?

Thanks a lot !
Alex Makhov  
#19 Posted : Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:53:20 PM(UTC)
Alex Makhov

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 8/3/2003(UTC)
Posts: 998

Hello,

You could upgrade to DUAL now and after Image Uploader for ActiveX 4.1 is released (it will be in September or November) the upgrade from 4.0 to 4.1 will be free.
Sincerely yours,
Alex Makhov

UserPostedImage Follow Aurigma on Twitter!
eg_hch  
#20 Posted : Monday, November 06, 2006 4:54:03 PM(UTC)
eg_hch

Rank: Member

Groups: Member
Joined: 6/13/2006(UTC)
Posts: 22

Did the small buffer size problem in Internet Explorer solve by the release on 4 Nov?
Where can I find the change log of Image Uploader between different versions?
Users browsing this topic
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.