actually we have one application for file storage (Dropbox) which is using the AWS s3 bucket .
we have diffrect plans for end users like Free and silver/paied depanding on the size of file.
Some time users upload the file druing the upload process its intrept due to some reason like
1 - user cancel the uploading Process in middle
2 - Network glitch between user's internet and AWS S3
In above cases if for example user try to upload 1GB file and in the middle of upload process user/he/she cancel it, in this cases 50% (0.5GB) file was already uploaded to S3.
so that uploaded file is there on the s3 backet and it occoupied the space on s3 and also we have to pay for that 0.5GB file.
I want if upload process kill by end user or due to the network issue the uploaded part of file should be delete from s3 after some time or on the same time when user upload it and it was not completed/intercepted.
how can i define a life cycle for S3 bucket to accomplished my requirement.
You can create a new rule for incomplete multipart uploads using the Console:
1) Start by opening the console and navigating to the desired bucket
2) Then click on Properties, open up the Lifecycle section, and click on Add rule:
3) Decide on the target (the whole bucket or the prefixed subset of your choice) and then click on Configure Rule:
4) Then enable the new rule and select the desired expiration period:
5) As a best practice, we recommend that you enable this setting even if you are not sure that you are actually making use of multipart uploads. Some applications will default to the use of multipart uploads when uploading files above a particular, application-dependent, size.
Here’s how you set up a rule to remove delete markers for expired objects that have no previous versions:
You can refer this AWS Blog Post
Note: If you are on New Console Select Bucket --> Click Management
(4th Tab) --> Select Lifecycle Tab (1st) --> Click Add Lifecycle Rule
Butto
n.
Related
We are using an S3 bucket to hold customer zip files they created and made ready for them to download. We are using CloudFront only to handle the SSL. We have caching disabled.
The customer receives an email to download their zip file, and that works great. The S3 lifecycle removes the file after 2 weeks. Now, if they add more photos to their account and re-request their zip file, it overwrites the current zip file with the new version. So the link is exactly the same. But when they download, it's the previous zip file, not the new one.
Additionally after the two weeks, the file is removed and they try to download they get an error that basically says they need to login and re-request their photos. So they generate a zip file but their link still gives them the error message.
I could have the lambda that creates the zip file invalidate the file when it creates it, but I didn't think I needed to invalidate since we aren't caching?
Below is the screenshot of the caching policy I have selected in CloudFront
I have an ETL application which is suppose to migrate to AWS infra. The scheduler being used in my application is Tivoli Work Scheduler and we want to use the same on cloud as well which has file dependencies.
Now when we move to aws , the files to be watched will land in S3 Bucket. Can we put the OPEN dependency for files in S3? If yes, What would be the hostname ( HOST#Filepath ) ?
If Not, what services should be aligned to serve the purpose. I have both time as well as file dependency in my SCHEDULES.
Eg. The file might get uploaded on S3 at 1AM. AT 3 AM my schedule will get triggered, look for the file in S3 bucket. If present, starts execution and if not then it should wait as per other parameters on tws.
Any help or advice would be nice to have.
If I understand this correctly, job triggered at 3am will identify all files uploaded within last e.g. 24 hours.
You can list all s3 files to list everything uploaded within specific period of time.
Better solution would be to create S3 upload trigger which will send information to SQS and have your code inspect the depth (number of messages) there and start processing the files one by one. An additional benefit would be an assurance that all items are processed without having to worry about time overalpse.
I see on the Lambda support pages there are examples of scripts to create thumbnail images in a separate bucket any time an image is uploaded. But I'm looking at using S3 to upload customer image files for multiple customers. We will likely use something like dropzone.js for handling the uploads and I've already built a working example to upload to an existing bucket.
But since we will be dealing with multiple customers, I'm wondering what the best-practices for handling different customer files is when used in conjunction with S3 and especially with the need to display thumbnails to the customer.
I note the Lambda solution appears to use a pre-configured bucket including all of the necessary permissions and event triggers to run the script. I'm not as familiar with node.js and have done very little in Java or python, and I'm new to the aws environment.
Should I create a new bucket for each customer? Can I? Do I have to add new lambda createThumbnail permissions/event-triggers every time a new bucket is created for a new customer?
Is there a better way to do this?
I would also be curious to know (being new to node.js and aws) how difficult it would be to build a cached thumbnail only when it was requested as opposed to trying to build one whenever a file is uploaded.
SW
You can use the same bucket with each sub-folder containing thumbnails images for each customer/user (You can name each folder with ${user_id} or something similar)
The workflow could be
Full image is uploaded to S3 to customer sub-folder with from your UI (dropzone.js or whatever)
Upon success upload. Use S3 object creation event to trigger your Lambda to process & generate a thumbnail. (putting it in thumbnail sub-fol
dr is an option).
Ex:
YOUR_NEW_BUCKET
|
----customer_1
|
___Image1.png
___Image2.jpg
___Thumbnails
|
___Image1.png
___Image2.jpg
We are using S3 for our image upload process. We approve all the images that are uploaded on our website. The process is like:
Clients upload images on S3 from javascript at a given path. (using token)
Once, we get back the url from S3, we save the S3 path in our database with 'isApproved flag false' in photos table.
Once the image is approved through our executive, the images start displaying on our website.
The problem is that the user may change the image (to some obscene image) after the approval process through the token generated. Can we somehow stop users from modifying the images like this?
One temporary fix is to shorten the token lifetime interval i.e. 5 minutes and approve the images after that interval only.
I saw this but didn't help as versioning is also replacing the already uploaded image and moving previously uploaded image to new versioned path.
Any better solutions?
You should create a workflow around the uploaded images. The process would be:
The client uploads the image
This triggers an Amazon S3 event notification to you/your system
If you approve the image, move it to the public bucket that is serving your content
If you do not approve the image, delete it
This could be an automated process using an AWS Lambda function to update your database and flag photos for approval, or it could be done manually after receiving an email notification via Amazon SNS. The choice is up to you.
The benefit of this method is that nothing can be substituted once approved.
I Would like to test and see that my TTL=0 did work.
What I have:
S3 bucket that is mounted to directory in my redhat. so when I edit a simple txt file from the shell, I can open it in the aws console bucket manager and view the file. Also I have created cloudfront distribution so i can open the txt file from the cloudfront link.
Test:
I edit the txt file with the telnet, then open it from aws console on S3 bucket section, i see the file has changed, but when i open the file on the cloudfront link, it didnt change. This means the TTL=0 did not work.
How can i verify TTL=0 works ? and it is set correctly ? after creating the distribution i cannot find where to edit the TTL again.
Thanks
Quoting AWS:
Note that our default behavior isn’t changing; if no cache control header is set, each edge location will continue to use an expiration period of 24 hours before checking the origin for changes to that file. You can also continue to use Amazon CloudFront's Invalidation feature to expire a file sooner than the TTL set on that file.
You're likely not setting the cache control correctly. One way to confirm that is to Enable S3 Bucket Logging - New files will appear whenever there are new HTTP GETs from your S3 Bucket, even if they come from CloudFront.
You could also test S3 Directly, with curl (or s3curl) so you can track its headers correctly.
My recommendation is that, whenever you upload new content, you force CloudFront to Invalidate. If you're using tools like s3fs, then inotify/icron might help you
(Disclaimer: I totally hate the whole idea of mapping filesystems off to S3. They're quite different tools and you're likely to get 'leaky abstractions')
It is most likely that you are not sending any TTL headers from S3. CloudFront will look for a TTL header in the source file and if it doesn't find anything, will default to 24 hours.
You could look to set a bucket policy or use a tool like S3 browser to automatically set the headers. http://s3browser.com/automatically-apply-http-headers.php
If you just want to test then I would follow the steps below.
Create a new text file in your bucket
Through the AWS console, locate the file and check and/or add the caching headers
Retrieve the file from CloudFront
Change the file in the bucket
Check the headers of the new file in AWS console (your S3 mapping utility may erase the previous file headers)
Retrieve the new changed file from CloudFront
Sending an invalidate call to CloudFront with each request may become chargeable if you have a large number of edits a month. Plus invalidations take several minutes (sometimes 20mins or more) to propagate, meaning you could never instantly change your content.