Web application store files

Today, most modern browsers will not prompt the user, and will allow a site to use up to its allotted quota. The exception appears to be Safari, which prompts at MB, asking permission to store up to 1. If an origin attempts to use more than its allotted quota, further attempts to write data will fail. In many browsers , you can use the StorageManager API to determine the amount of storage available to the origin, and how much storage it's using. It reports the total number of bytes used by IndexedDB and the Cache API, and makes it possible to calculate the approximate remaining storage space available.

The StorageManager isn't implemented in all browsers yet, so you must feature detect it before using it. Even when it is available, you must still catch over-quota errors see below. In some cases, it's possible for the available quota to exceed the actual amount of storage available. During development, you can use your browser's DevTools to inspect the different storage types, and easily clear all stored data.

A new feature was added in Chrome 88 that lets you override the site's storage quota in the Storage Pane. This feature gives you the ability to simulate different devices and test the behavior of your apps in low disk availability scenarios. Go to Application then Storage , enable the Simulate custom storage quota checkbox, and enter any valid number to simulate the storage quota. While working on this article, I wrote a simple tool to attempt to quickly use as much storage as possible.

It's a quick and easy way to experiment with different storage mechanisms, and see what happens when you use all of your quota. What should you do when you go over quota?

Most importantly, you should always catch and handle write errors, whether it's a QuotaExceededError or something else. Then, depending on your app design, decide how to handle it. For example delete content that hasn't been accessed in a long time, remove data based on size, or provide a way for users to choose what they want to delete.

If the origin has exceeded its quota, attempts to write to IndexedDB will fail. Viewed 2k times. Length]; model.

Read uploadedFile, 0, uploadedFile. BeginForm null, null, FormMethod. File Html. Thanks for your time. Improve this question. MoonKnight MoonKnight The good thing with that approach is not only the security, but also the possibility to do additional tasks when file is downloaded logging, I take it storing the raw data in a database is not the way to go?

Also, using this as your Avitar would be awesome! Well storing it in the database is also a possibility indeed offering the same advantages as you also need to access it through a handler. DB storage is usually more expensive than file storage though, so you might want to keep the size of stored data quite low.

That said, the big advantage of both those solutions is that you can decide to switch to any other solution afterwards, updating your handler will make the change transparent towards your users Add a comment.

Amazon has a list of regions for which you can store files in S3 on their website here. The first thing you need to do is use the list above to pick the most appropriate location for storing your files. Next, you need to create an S3 bucket. An S3 bucket is basically a directory for which all of your files will be stored.

I usually give my S3 buckets the same name as my application. S3 allows you to create as many buckets as you want, but each bucket name must be globally unique. This brings us to the next question: how should you structure your S3 bucket when storing user files? You might then create three sub-folders in your main S3 bucket for each of these users — this way, when you store user files for these users, those files are stored in the appropriately named sub-folders.

This is a nice structure because you can easily see the separation of files by user, which makes managing these files in a central location simple. If you have multiple processes or applications reading and writing these files, you already know your what files are owned by which user.

The answer is custom data. This is the perfect place to store file metadata to make searching for user files simpler. This is a nice structure for storing file metadata because it means that every time you have the user account object in your application code, you can easily know:. This JSON data makes it much easier to build complex web applications, as you can seamlessly find your user files either directly from S3, or from your user account.

FileStream doesn't support encryption. Seems EF core doesn't have support for it either. That being said, filestream blobs are accessible as varbinary max columns on the table, and.

NET SqlClient supports streaming blobs. There is an Encryption attribute you may be able to apply to your EF core model I have not used it. It may be worth checking out. From Microsoft :. The SQL Server buffer pool is not used; therefore, this memory is available for query processing.

You then apply the Encrypted Attribute to property in your model. It will encrypt the field, not the file. Not sure why you need to encrypt the file if it's in a secure place that is only accessible via a secure API.

We need the ability to encrypt certain files as a second level of security. Encryption is not supported with the FileStream feature and EF core will not encrypt the file for you.