timuralp commented on this pull request.
> .append("-")
.append(partsList.size())
.append("\"")
.toString();
assertThat(blob.getMetadata().getETag()).isEqualTo(expectedETag);
}
+ @Test(groups = { "integration", "live" })
+ public void testMultipartUploadMultiplePartsKnownETag() throws Exception {
+ BlobStore blobStore = view.getBlobStore();
+ String container = getContainerName();
+ // Pre-computed ETag returned by AWS S3 for the MPU consisting of two
5MB parts filled with 'b'
+ String expectedETag = "\"84462a16f6a60478d50148808aa609c1-2\"";
Good question. Some providers return a similar value, like Swift for static
large objects. Others have a different ETag, like Azure, which uses an opaque
identifier. The initial proposal I had was to use AWS S3-style ETags because it
allows for an easy way to emulate S3 using jclouds (like with the S3Proxy
project). That's the motivation behind this PR and the prior one related to it:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/1251.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/1252#discussion_r228363312
