Image ID overflow???

yanash

Hi Guys!

I get weird response when I upload an image to http://upload.smugmug.com/. It does look like you are using 32-bit integer at some point but image IDs ran out of the space.

Here is sample reply, notice that image ID in URL is fine, but the ID it self is negative:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><methodResponse><params><param><value><struct> <member><name>method</name><value><string>smugmug.images.upload</string></value></member><member><name>Image</name><value><struct><member><name>id</name><value><int>-2146731493</int></value></member><member><name>Key</name><value><string>2JCtpBT</string></value></member><member><name>URL</name><value><string>http://allseasons.smugmug.com/Catego...525767_LdRQQC#2148235803_2JCtpBT</string></value></member></struct></value></member></struct></value></param></params></methodResponse>

rainforest1155

Can you share more details on what uploader, browser and operating system you used? If you used the API, what version of the API did you use?

If you didn't use the API, with what tools did you obtain the response that you posted?
Can you reproduce the result? If so could you provide the steps that you take to get that response result?

Chicago6061

I too have seen a problem. When calling 'smugmug.images.get' I get an exception: 'Value was either too large or too small for an Int32'. I'm using the http://smugmugc3.codeplex.com C# wrapper. This is only happening on albums created in the last day or so.

rainforest1155 wrote: »

Can you share more details on what uploader, browser and operating system you used? If you used the API, what version of the API did you use?

If you didn't use the API, with what tools did you obtain the response that you posted?
Can you reproduce the result? If so could you provide the steps that you take to get that response result?

rainforest1155

Chicago6061 wrote: »

I too have seen a problem. When calling 'smugmug.images.get' I get an exception: 'Value was either too large or too small for an Int32'. I'm using the http://smugmugc3.codeplex.com C# wrapper. This is only happening on albums created in the last day or so.

That sounds like something that would need to be fixed in that C# wrapper where it's using Int32 instead of an element capable of larger numbers. Check out this post from Nik - it's also something he had to fix on his end. So I'm not seeing anything pointing towards a change on our end other than the image ID has outgrown the int32 element used in some apps.

That said I'll check with our team to see if we can make it clearer in the API docs on what specified element should be used for the imageID.

Chicago6061

I can confirm that after having patched the C# wrapper library to use 'long' instead of 'int', everything works fine again...

rainforest1155 wrote: »

That sounds like something that would need to be fixed in that C# wrapper where it's using Int32 instead of an element capable of larger numbers. Check out this post from Nik - it's also something he had to fix on his end. So I'm not seeing anything pointing towards a change on our end other than the image ID has outgrown the int32 element used in some apps.

That said I'll check with our team to see if we can make it clearer in the API docs on what specified element should be used for the imageID.

devbobo

yanash wrote: »

Hi Guys!

I get weird response when I upload an image to http://upload.smugmug.com/. It does look like you are using 32-bit integer at some point but image IDs ran out of the space.

Here is sample reply, notice that image ID in URL is fine, but the ID it self is negative:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><methodResponse><params><param><value><struct> <member><name>method</name><value><string>smugmug.images.upload</string></value></member><member><name>Image</name><value><struct><member><name>id</name><value><int>-2146731493</int></value></member><member><name>Key</name><value><string>2JCtpBT</string></value></member><member><name>URL</name><value><string>http://allseasons.smugmug.com/Catego...525767_LdRQQC#2148235803_2JCtpBT</string></value></member></struct></value></member></struct></value></param></params></methodResponse>

G'day yanash,

Unfortunately, the XML-RPC spec only supports a 4-byte signed integer. You might be able to convert the result into an unsigned integer. But I believe that the best approach would be to drop XML-RPC and use other API type like JSON, etc.

Cheers,

David