I'm currently working on a Django application using AngularJS for the frontend part.
I want for the moment to upload some images on the server and get as callback a list with the paths of the uploaded files. I want to send afterwards to the API (I am using Tastypie framework) as a POST request the callback and insert it into the database in a specific field. My issue is that I don't know how to approach the images upload (I should use PHP?) part and most important how to receive the callback? I hope that I explain clear enough. :D
Documentation for uploading files in django: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/http/file-uploads/
HTML only allows to upload one file per upload-controller. To upload multiple files either the user can create a zip file (or similar), upload that and on the server side you extract it into multiple files. Or you have to use a flash component. There are lots of these available, for example http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/uploader/
Related
I'm stuck wondering what the best solution is to handling large file uploads and sending them to a third-party API. Any pointers on what would be a good solution would be very welcome. Thank you in advance.
The end goal is to send video files to this API - https://docs.bunny.net/reference/manage-videos#video_uploadvideo. The complication is that the files are often large - up to 5GB in size.
I have an existing website built in PHP7 that runs on a LAMP setup on Amazon Lightsail and I want to add a feature for users to upload video files.
Currently I'm uploading the files directly to Amazon S3 using a pre-signed URL. This part is working fine.
But I need to send the files to the API mentioned above. This is where I get stuck!
I think there's two options to explore - (1) find a way to upload directly to the API and skip the S3 upload or (2) continue with uploading to S3 first and then transfer to the API. But I'm not sure if option 1 is even possible or how to do option 2!
With option 1, I'm wondering if there's a way to upload the files from the users directly to the API. If I do this using the regular HTML form upload, then the files are stored temporarily on my server before I can use cURL through PHP to transfer them to the API. This is really time consuming and feels very inefficient. But I don't know how else to send the files to the API without them first being on my server. Maybe there's an option here that I don't know about!
With option 2, I can already upload large files directly to S3 with pre-signed URLs and this process seems to run fine. But I don't know how I would then send the file from S3 to the API. I can use an S3 trigger on new files. But when I looked at Lambda, they have a tiny file size limit. Because my site is hosted on Lightsail, I noticed they have a container option. But I don't know if that can be used for this purpose and if so, how.
Basically, I'm not sure what solution is best, nor how to proceed with that. And maybe there's an option 3 that I'm not aware of!
I would welcome your input.
Many thanks in advance.
Relatively new to web development here, but am trying to implement an image upload feature, the contents of which will be previewed to the person (administrator) uploading the image, and then stored in a database (and displayed to the end user on a different page).
I found a resource that uses a Imageshack API, and was a bit confused about what this is and how the person implemented the API to achieve the image upload. The code for this is here: http://www.sceditor.com/posts/how-to-upload-and-insert-an-image/
When I googled "Imageshack API," I kept running across something that said I need to request a key. What does this mean, and do I have to do it? Is this the easiest way to go about creating an image upload feature for my purposes?
Thank you all very much!
Imageshack API is for uploading image files to your account hosted at Imageshack.com. It seems that you want to upload image files to your own website and store such files on your own web servers (either in a cloud service such as AWS or your co-located/managed servers at some data centres). So, you probably do not want to use Imageshack.
As to how to upload image files using HTML & PHP, you may want to check out a short tutorial at:
www.w3schools.com/php/php_file_upload.asp
Also, by the way, storing image files into a database such as MySQL may not be a good idea -- image files should be stored as files. It is faster to access such image files on a web server than to access image contents stored in a database.
I wanna make my own little renderfarm-backend building on php and mysql. I have a huge plan for doing everything but there is one problem. How can I upload an image without a form?
Three alternatives:
you make exactly the POST request a browser would do when submitting an upload form, you do not need the form for that. It is a simple http POST. You can find countless examples for that here on SO or on google.
take a look at webdav, an http extension that allows flexible file access via http. Might make sense if you want to integrate your uploading into something like a local file manager or the like.
you use a file centered protocol for uploading, so implement the upload separate from the php stuff. sftp comes to mind here, but obviously you need to setup a separate server for that and map the file system locations as required. Also you have to take care of the file permissions.
i am trying to upload an image with Ajax/jquery without refreshing and also without using any php in back-end.
i searched alot but all are using php at back-end, my requirement is not to use php.
http://www.9lessons.info/2011/08/ajax-image-upload-without-refreshing.html
http://dondedeportes.es/uploader-previewer/
if not possible without php . please suggest me some alternatives .
No, it's not possible to upload an image without some kind of backend to process the upload.
You can't upload the image to the server without server-side processing.
If your goal is just to show the image in the page, without uploading it to the server (perhaps as a preview), that's possible on newer browsers via a combination of the File API and a data: URI. The File API gives you client-side access to the file a user identifies, including the ability to read its contents; and a data: URI lets you put an image on the page using the data from that image file.
What kind of server are you using? If it supports Webdav, you could use a Javascript Webdav-Client. But for this, the server has to be configured.
I am launching a web application soon that will be serving a fair amount of images so I'd like to have a main web server and a static content server and possibly a separate database server later on.
I'd like the user to:
login and be able to upload a photo
the photo is renamed a randrom string
the photo is processed into a thumbnail
the photo and thumbnail are stored into a filesystem on the static server.
the photo and thumbnail's directory and filename are stored in a mysql database
The problem is I don't know how to have the user instantly upload an image to a separate server.
I thought about using amazon s3, but you can't edit filenames before posting them. (through POST, I'd rather not use the REST api)
I could also use php's ftp function to upload to a separate server, but I'd like to dynamically create folders based on the properties of the image (so I don't have all the images in one big folder obviously), but I don't know how this would work if I used ftp...
Or I could save them locally and use a CDN, I'm not too familiar with CDN's so I don't know if using them this way would be appropriate or cost-effective.
What are my options here? I'd like the images to be available instantly (no cron jobs/queues)
Thanks.
You can create directories over FTP with PHP, so that should not be a showstopper.
I thought about using amazon s3, but you can't edit filenames before posting them. (through POST, I'd rather not use the REST api)
If you let your PHP server do the uploading to S3 via POST, you can name the files whatever you want. You should do that anyway, letting your users upload to S3 directly, without your PHP code inbetween, sounds like bad for security to me.