A question on the similar lines: I have a web service which receives image data as byte[] contained in a complex type. The service then uses hibernate to store the object in MySQL. The column type in MySQL is text (which as per MySQL is equivalent to CLOB/BLOB). Now when I retrieve the object using the GET interface of the same service (which gets the data out of the database table and packs it back into the byte[]), on the client side it seems that the data is corrupt. About 10% of the bytes differ from the actual byte[] object when I do a byte comparison.
I suspect something goes on during the serialization/deserialization phase. Have anyone encountered similar problems? Regards Arijit >-----Original Message----- >From: Hamilton, Ian [IT] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 28 January 2005 17:44 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Sending binary data as byte array > >Steve, > >Check out this article: >http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ws-tip-noattach.html >it gives some insight into what you ask. > >I also know that sending binary data as a byte array increases >the data's size by about 33%, according to what I've read. >That's because of the base64 encoding that goes on. > >I did the same sort of thing in a web service I wrote >recently. I looked into SOAP with Attachments, and I looked >into sending DIME attachments. From what I read, .NET doesn't >support S/wA, and DIME isn't a "real" standard. That's why I >went with the byte[] solution in my case. > >-Ian > >-----Original Message----- >From: Brammer, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 12:33 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Sending binary data as byte array > > > >Hi, > > >I have implemented a web service using axis and I consume the >web service from .Net. I have a need to send and receive >binary data (office documents) but I haven't been able to work >out how to use DIME attachements, so I have worked around this >by simply turning the filestream into a byte array and >handling this inside the complex types I already pass back and >forth. The solution works great and also seems pretty fast, >although I have not tried it for really massive documents yet. >Can anyone tell me this disadvantages of doing this (if there >are any). This seems much easier than implementing attachments >and it also gets around any interop issues as I am just >passing the binary content as a simple type (byte[]). What is >the downside, if any, and are there any 'gotchas' I am going >to get caught out by?? > > >/Steve > > >____________________________________________________________ >Steve Brammer | Capgemini | Västerås >IT Consultant | Technology Services | Portals & Mobility >Tel: +46 8 5368 6204 | Mobile: +46 70 2438544 >Fax: +46 21 127635 | www.capgemini.com >Ingenjör Bååths Gata, SE-721 83, Västerås, Sweden > > >Join the Collaborative Business Experience >____________________________________________________________ > > > > >This message contains information that may be privileged or >confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is >intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you >are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to >read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use >this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message >in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all >copies of this message. > > >
