You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Are we planning to implement the option to resume partial transfers ? We could have this option shown when a file already exists but there is size mismatch.
Following are the reasons why I believe we could add this features:
Save time and resources - Scenario: when a person is transferring 2GB file, and for some reason the transfer is interrupted after 1GB. Then the option to resume will be very beneficial
Since the person performing the transfer will know if they are sharing the same file or not. So, just deleting the partially received file and re-transferring the whole file is wasteful efforts. And, since the user will be deciding whether to "resume the transfer or not", it will be a safe thing.
A possible change to the working when receiving the data which could help this feature as well as the user:
Currently - When a file is being received, we use the original file name itself
In this case, it is hard to differentiate if the file is partially received or fully received.
No way other than relying on the user to know whether there is a possibility of resuming a partial transfer or not
Proposal - When receiving, we could use the file name as <NAME>.<SIZE_BYTES>.part (.part is the extension used by browsers when file download is in-progress), and once fully received, we could rename it to <NAME>
User can easily know if a file is partially received or fully received by just looking at the file name
When re-sending files that were interrupted, SIZE_BYTES in the file name can help know whether we should show the resume option to the user or not (thus reducing false positives to a great extent)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
If we want to be 100% sure about resuming a transfer then, the following mechanism can be followed:
the sender will tell the receiver the file name and file size (in bytes) which is going to be sent
the receiver can do first round of file resume possibility check based on the logic explained in the previous comment
if the file seems non-resume-able based on above check, then we goto step 6.ii, else goto step 4
the receiver can tell the sender that X bytes have already been received
the sender will calculate a hash (possibly SHA256) of those first X bytes of the file which is being sent, and give it to the receiver
the receiver also calculates the hash and compares it with the received value
i. if hash matches, then we can resume the transfer
ii. if hash does not match, then the receiver asks the sender to send the full file
Thus, there will be two levels of checking:
based on file size (i.e bytes) which is there in file name - this will eliminate many false positives at almost zero cost
based on hash (a collision resistant hash like SHA256) - this will eliminate all false positives and will be way faster than sending the data over network
Hi team,
Thanks a lot for this powerful app 🙏
Are we planning to implement the option to resume partial transfers ? We could have this option shown when a file already exists but there is size mismatch.
Following are the reasons why I believe we could add this features:
A possible change to the working when receiving the data which could help this feature as well as the user:
<NAME>.<SIZE_BYTES>.part
(.part is the extension used by browsers when file download is in-progress), and once fully received, we could rename it to<NAME>
SIZE_BYTES
in the file name can help know whether we should show the resume option to the user or not (thus reducing false positives to a great extent)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: