I want to store user action logs continuously to s3 file for that session.
Requirements:
for a session single file
continuous write operations to s3
should be able to download that file at the end of the session.
Dont want to create new file for single session, want to update same file. Please suggest only AWS solutions.
Do i need to create stream and use it with s3 or using mediator storage system and push once in while.
Objects in Amazon S3 are immutable -- they cannot be modified after they are created.
From your description, a good solution would be to use Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose. Your app can stream data to the Firehose and it will combine data together based on size or time. A long session might therefore produce multiple output files, so you would need a separate process that combines those files together into a single file.
Related
I need a solution for entering new data in csv that is stored in S3 bucket in AWS.
At this point we are downloading the file, editing and then uploading it again in s3 and we would like to automatize this process.
We need to add one row in a three column.
Thank you in advance!
I think you will be able to do that using Lambda Functions. You will need to programmatically make the modifications you need over the CSV but there are multiple programming languages that allow you to do that. One quick example is using python and the csv library
Then you can invoke that lambda or add more logic to the operations you want to do using an AWS API Gateway.
You can access the CSV file (object) inside the S3 Bucket from the lambda code using the AWS SDK and append the new rows with data you pass as parameters to the function
There is no way to directly modify the csv stored in S3 (if that is what you're asking). The process will always entail some version of download, modify, upload. There are many examples of how you can do this, for example here
I have a task to analyze weather forecast data in Quicksight. The forecast data is held in NetCDF binary files in a public S3 bucket. The question is: how do you expose the contents of these binary files to Quicksight or even Athena?
There are python libraries that will decode the data from the binary files, such as Iris. They are used like this:
import iris
filename = iris.sample_data_path('forecast_20200304.nc')
cubes = iris.load(filename)
print(cubes)
So what would be the AWS workflow and services necessary to create a data ingestion pipeline that would:
Respond to an SQS message that a new binary file is available
Access the new binary file and decode it to access the forecast data
Add the decoded data to the set of already decoded data from previous SQS notifications
Make all the decoded data available in Athena / Quicksight
Tricky one, this...
What I would do is probably something like this:
Write a Lambda function in Python that is triggered when new files appear in the S3 bucket – either by S3 notifications (if you control the bucket), by SNS, SQS, or by schedule in EventBridge. The function uses the code snipplet included in your question to transform each new file and upload the transformed data to another S3 bucket.
I don't know the size of these files and how often they are published, so whether to convert to CSV, JSON, or Parquet is something you have to decide – if the data is small CSV will probably be easiest and will be good enough.
With the converted data in a new S3 bucket all you need to do is create an Athena table for the data set and start using QuickSight.
If you end up with a lot of small files you might want to implement a second step where you once per day combine the converted files into bigger files, and possibly Parquet, but don't do anything like that unless you have to.
An alternative way would be to use Athena Federated Query: by implementing Lambda function(s) that respond to specific calls from Athena you can make Athena read any data source that you want. It's currently in preview, and as far as I know all the example code is written in Java – but theoretically it would be possible to write the Lambda functions in Python.
I'm not sure whether it would be less work than implementing an ETL workflow like the one you suggest, but yours is one of the use cases for which Athena Federated Query was designed for and it might be worth looking into. If NetCDF files are common and a data source for such files would be useful for other people I'm sure the Athena team would love to talk to you and help you out.
Currently we are having a aws lambda (java based runtime) which takes a SNS as input and then perform business logic and generate 1 XML file , store it to S3.
The implementation now is create the XML at .tmp location which we know there is space limitation of aws lambda (500mb).
Do we have any way to still use lambda but can stream XML file to S3 without using .tmp folder?
I do research but still do not find solution for it.
Thank you.
You can directly load an object to s3 from memory without having to store it locally. You can use the put object API for this. However, keep in mind that you still have time and total memory limits with lambda as well. You may run out of those too if your object size is too big.
If you can split the file into chunks and don't require to update the beginning of the file while working with its end you can use multipart upload providing a ready to go chunk and then free the memory for the next chunk.
Otherwise you still need a temporary storage for form all the parts of the XML. You can use DynamoDB or Redis and when you collect there all the parts of the XML you can start uploading it part by part, then cleanup the db (or set TTL to automate the cleanup).
Considering the fact that there is no data pipeline available in Singapore region, are there any alternatives available to efficiently push csv data to dynamodb?
If it was me, I would setup an s3 event notification on a bucket that fires a lambda function each time a CSV file was dropped into it.
The Notification would let Lambda know that a new file was available and a lambda function would be responsible for loading the data into dynamodb.
This would work better (because of the limits of lambda) if the CSV files were not huge, so they could be processed in a reasonable amount of time, and the bonus is the only worked that would need to be done once it was working would be to simply drop the new files into the right bucket - no server required.
Here is a github repository that has a CSV->Dynamodb loader written in java - it might help get you started.
We need to move our video file storage to AWS S3. The old location is a cdn, so I only have url for each file (1000+ files, > 1TB total file size). Running an upload tool directly on the storage server is not an option.
I already created a tool that downloads the file, uploads file to S3 bucket and updates the DB records with new HTTP url and works perfectly except it takes forever.
Downloading the file takes some time (considering each file close to a gigabyte) and uploading it takes longer.
Is it possible to upload the video file directly from cdn to S3, so I could reduce processing time into half? Something like reading chunk of file and then putting it to S3 while reading next chunk.
Currently I use System.Net.WebClient to download the file and AWSSDK to upload.
PS: I have no problem with internet speed, I run the app on a server with 1GBit network connection.
No, there isn't a way to direct S3 to fetch a resource, on your behalf, from a non-S3 URL and save it in a bucket.
The only "fetch"-like operation S3 supports is the PUT/COPY operation, where S3 supports fetching an object from one bucket and storing it in another bucket (or the same bucket), even across regions, even across accounts, as long as you have a user with sufficient permission for the necessary operations on both ends of the transaction. In that one case, S3 handles all the data transfer, internally.
Otherwise, the only way to take a remote object and store it in S3 is to download the resource and then upload it to S3 -- however, there's nothing preventing you from doing both things at the same time.
To do that, you'll need to write some code, using presumably either asynchronous I/O or threads, so that you can simultaneously be receiving a stream of downloaded data and uploading it, probably in symmetric chunks, using S3's Multipart Upload capability, which allows you to write individual chunks (minimum 5MB each) which, with a final request, S3 will validate and consolidate into a single object of up to 5TB. Multipart upload supports parallel upload of chunks, and allows your code to retry any failed chunks without restarting the whole job, since the individual chunks don't have to be uploaded or received by S3 in linear order.
If the origin supports HTTP range requests, you wouldn't necessarily even need to receive a "stream," you could discover the size of the object and then GET chunks by range and multipart-upload them. Do this operation with threads or asynch I/O handling multiple ranges in parallel, and you will likely be able to copy an entire object faster than you can download it in a single monolithic download, depending on the factors limiting your download speed.
I've achieved aggregate speeds in the range of 45 to 75 Mbits/sec while uploading multi-gigabyte files into S3 from outside of AWS using this technique.
This has been answered by me in this question, here's the gist:
object = Aws::S3::Object.new(bucket_name: 'target-bucket', key: 'target-key')
object.upload_stream do |write_stream|
IO.copy_stream(URI.open('http://example.com/file.ext'), write_stream)
end
This is no 'direct' pull-from-S3, though. At least this doesn't download each file and then uploads in serial, but streams 'through' the client. If you run the above on an EC2 instance in the same region as your bucket, I believe this is as 'direct' as it gets, and as fast as a direct pull would ever be.
if a proxy ( node express ) is suitable for you then the portions of code at these 2 routes could be combined to do a GET POST fetch chain, retreiving then re-posting the response body to your dest. S3 bucket.
step one creates response.body
step two
set the stream in 2nd link to response from the GET op in link 1 and you will upload to dest.bucket the stream ( arrayBuffer ) from the first fetch