Upload mode (ORAF, OROF, EXTS, AWSS3)

The DEXTUploadX5 product offers three ways to upload files (ORAF, OROF, and EXTS), and additionally supports AWSS3 (since 4.0.0.0) mode for uploading files to Amazon Web Services' Simple Storage Service (S3).

The default is ORAF, and if you want to change the upload mode, you can do so using the setUploadMode function.

EXTS refers to large file uploads like EXNJ, and both are available.

var dx = dx5.get("component-id");
// Set the upload mode to ORAF, OROF, EXTS, AWSS3.
dx.setUploadMode("ORAF");

ORAF

ORAF (default) sends all the files to be uploaded in one request.

If you have 10 files to upload, you will send all 10 files to the server with one request.

Since the HTTP multipart data typically is limited on the server to not exceed a maximum of 2GB bytes, the sum of the ten files should be less than 2GB.

At the end of the upload process on the server, the response data is returned only once.

Pros and cons	Explanation
Pros.	All files are transferred at once, so when processing on the server side, you only need to process all or none of the files. Rollback is easy if there is a problem on the server or network during transmission. (The part where the temporary file is generated is not considered) Server-side development (code-concise) is easy.
Cons.	The sum of all files typically can not exceed 2 GB. When a large number of files are transmitted at once, the data size becomes large, which causes a problem of occupying network traffic for a long time. If the traffic information occupies a long time, the responsiveness of the server is degraded.

Pros and cons

Explanation

Pros.

All files are transferred at once, so when processing on the server side, you only need to process all or none of the files.

Rollback is easy if there is a problem on the server or network during transmission. (The part where the temporary file is generated is not considered)

Server-side development (code-concise) is easy.

Cons.

The sum of all files typically can not exceed 2 GB.

When a large number of files are transmitted at once, the data size becomes large, which causes a problem of occupying network traffic for a long time.

If the traffic information occupies a long time, the responsiveness of the server is degraded.

OROF

OROF is requested as many times as the number of files to be uploaded.

If there are 10 files to upload, it will send the file to the server by requesting the same address for each individual file.

Since one file follows the sequential method of uploading the next file when the upload is completed, the response data is generated as many as the number of files when all the uploads are completed.

Typically, HTTP multipart data is limited on the server so that it can not exceed a maximum of 2GB bytes, so the size per file should be less than 2GB.

Pros and cons	Explanation
Pros.	The sum of the total file sizes is unlimited. Compared with the ORAF upload mode, the server is more responsive and the overall performance is improved. (If individual files are small) Since only one file is transferred at a time, there is no loop operation when processing on the server side.
Cons.	Since there is a request to the server by the number of the files, the server can not grasp the number and the total size of the files to be uploaded by only the request information. If there is a problem on the server or network during transmission, the uploaded files may be left in the server first. If the size of the individual files is large, the data size also becomes large, which causes a problem of occupying the network traffic for a long time. Server-side development is more complex than ORAF.

Pros and cons

Explanation

Pros.

The sum of the total file sizes is unlimited.

Compared with the ORAF upload mode, the server is more responsive and the overall performance is improved. (If individual files are small)

Since only one file is transferred at a time, there is no loop operation when processing on the server side.

Cons.

Since there is a request to the server by the number of the files, the server can not grasp the number and the total size of the files to be uploaded by only the request information.

If there is a problem on the server or network during transmission, the uploaded files may be left in the server first.

If the size of the individual files is large, the data size also becomes large, which causes a problem of occupying the network traffic for a long time.

Server-side development is more complex than ORAF.

EXTS

This upload mode is called the "Large file upload".

EXTS is a method for uploading large volumes, which is used when the size of an individual file or an entire file exceeds 2 GB.

Uploading files across multiple requests, such as OROF, is the same.

However, instead of dividing the upload request by the number of files, it divides the upload request in a predetermined block (chunk) unit.

The number of responses to a request occurs as many as the number of blocks, but the number of response data to be actually used for operation is generated by the number of files.

var dx = dx5.get(id);
// Set the upload method to large capacity.
dx.setUploadMode("EXTS");
// Set the block size in bytes to split the file.
dx.setUploadBlockSize(10 * 1024 * 1024);

To support EXTS mode, the server requires DEXTUpload Pro (version 4.0.0.0 or later), DEXTUpload.NET Pro (version 5.0.0.0 or later), or DEXTUploadNJ. For more information, see the "Uploading large files" document.

Pros and cons	Explanation
Pros.	There is no limit on individual and total file sizes. Compared to ORAF or OROF upload mode, the server is more responsive and greatly improves overall performance. The block unit can be adjusted so that it does not get caught in the server's own capacity filter. It is possible to continue uploading files previously stoppted.
Cons.	Since there are requests to the server by the number of blocks, the server can not grasp the number and the total size of the files to be uploaded by only the request information. The smaller the block unit, the more the number of requests. If there is a problem on the server or network during transmission, the uploaded files may be left in the server first. There is a problem that we need to merge the split blocks, so the server side development is very complicated. (But it's easy to process it by using with our server products.)

Pros and cons

Explanation

Pros.

There is no limit on individual and total file sizes.

Compared to ORAF or OROF upload mode, the server is more responsive and greatly improves overall performance.

The block unit can be adjusted so that it does not get caught in the server's own capacity filter.

It is possible to continue uploading files previously stoppted.

Cons.

Since there are requests to the server by the number of blocks, the server can not grasp the number and the total size of the files to be uploaded by only the request information.

The smaller the block unit, the more the number of requests.

If there is a problem on the server or network during transmission, the uploaded files may be left in the server first.

There is a problem that we need to merge the split blocks, so the server side development is very complicated. (But it's easy to process it by using with our server products.)

AWSS3

Refers to the upload method for uploading files to Amazon Simple Storage Service.

For more information, see 'Uploading large files to AWS S3.'