Size of XI messages processing image files

hi,
I hav a scenario in which XI is picking up images form a database and is sending them to another database.
The JDBC sender adapter in use has a query like select image, file name, file size from table where file name starts with 'a', thus at times the adapter ends up picking multiple images in one go.
When we check the size of the a single XI message payload carrying images as a result of the above adapter, it has been observed to be of double the size of the image being carried. For instance, if the image picked is of size 1MB the size of the XI message payload is shown as 2MB; in the <SAPMessageSizePayload> tag when the message is opened in SXI_MONITOR.
I want to know the reason behind the XI message payload size being double that of the size of the image it carries.
regards,
Diptee
Edited by: diptee s on Dec 18, 2010 11:10 AM
Edited by: diptee s on Dec 18, 2010 11:11 AM

Hi Diptee,
No, as far as I know. Since your scneario is DB1--> PI --> DB2, there is no need to covert the hexadecimal string to binary as it will be taken care by the receiver JDBC adapter while posting to DB2.
The JDBC adapter is designed to have the following XML structure as response. Assume that Col1 or Col2 is BLOB and then if JDBC adapter accomodates the binary stream, XML becomes invalid/incomplete.
<resultset>
<row>
<column-name1>column-value</ column-name1>
<column-name2>column-value</column-name2>
</row>
</resultset>
Regards,
Praveen Gujjeti
Edited by: Praveen Gujjeti on Dec 20, 2010 10:39 AM

Similar Messages

Is there a practical size limit on JPEG format image files?

I have noticed when working with Photoshop v7.0 on Windows XP that, when creating a JPEG format image file from a very large scanned image (more than 800 Mb, maybe), the .jpg file will usually be saved on disk at any of the possible compression ratios available, without any reported error, yet when the saved file is re-opened, an error is reported - something along the lines of "missing or corrupted end of file marker" - and the image cannot be loaded.
If before saving the original image is substantially reduced in size, e.g. by reducing the resolution of the image, a viable JPEG format file can be created, which will subsequently load successfully, though technically with data loss.
This appears to happen only with JPEG format files - PDF format files can be saved from the original image at similar JPEG compression ratios, without error on reloading.
I do not know if this also occurs with any other Photoshop versions. I am working with Adobe Photoshop v7.0 on Windows XP, although we are preparing to upgrade to CS (which version I don't know) in the near future, for different reasons to those which are detailed above.
Does anyone know if there is a technical explanation for this behaviour? Is there a file size limit for writing viable JPEG files (which Photoshop does not report as an error when exceeded)?
Thanks

Chris Cox wrote:
Where did you get the idea that we weren't doing something about it?
that's what I gathered from "JPEG cannot [...] in Photoshop (code difficult to replace)".
But if you say this is in the works right now, that's good news indeed.
Chris Cox wrote:
And where did you get the idea that posts get deleted? (other than SPAM)
Are you sure you're reading the same forum as the rest of us?
That's what happened:
The content you posted below was reported for abuse and removed by our
moderators:
Subject: Re: Is there a practical size limit on JPEG format image files?
Posted: 4/29/11 9:11 AM
Anyway, you gave an honest answer on this technical issue, Chris, and that's what counts.

PhotoShop Elements 10...I need help with font size for watermark in Processing Multiple Files.....

I have PhotoShop Elements 10, and I am trying to watermark some of my photos, I have successfully added them one at a time with a font large enough to be seen. Now I am trying to add it using the "process multiple files" , I can do that but the font even at 72 the largest setting is so small on the photo you can barely read it! Can anyone help me the size larger on my photos?

Thank you, Michael. I just watched the Russell Brown video again for CS6 and looked real closely at his settings in ACR and he was using 240ppi. I changed my file in image size to 240 ppi and then ran the script and the layer didn't change size this time when I ran the script.
It is kind of annoying to have to change the image size everytime I want to run this script and then change it back again as most of my files are 300 ppi. I used to run his script for edit in ARC in CS5 and recall that if I just remembered to change the settings in ARC to 300 ppi while the script was playing and before pressing 'open' that the image wouldn't change size during the raw processing, but this doesn't seem to be working in CS6. Do you know of a way to use this script and not have to change the ppi for the image to 240?
Thanks again.

Attempting to upgrade to Firefox 3.6 (using an ancient Mac OS 10.3), but received an error message (corrupt image file) when downloading - any way to correct this with my current OS?

I'm currently trying to update a few programs on my good old (VERY old) Mac Powerbook, but I ran into an error when downloading Firefox version 3.6...I'm currently running Mac OS X 10.3.9, which isn't compatible with the most recent versions of Firefox (or anything, for that matter), but it should still allow an upgrade of version 3.6; however, once the file finished downloading, an error message popped up indicating there's a corrupt image file. Is there any way to work around/correct this problem, or am I stuck with my old version of Firefox until I bite the bullet and upgrade my OS??? Any help is greatly appreciated!!

Firefox 3.6 requires at least OS X 10.4, the last version of Firefox that runs on OS X 10.3.9 is Firefox 2.0.0.20 available from https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/2.0.0.20/mac/en-US/

Incredibly strange file size discrepancy only appears in image files (jpg, gif, png)!

I'm creating a bunch of banners for google ads, yahoo ads, ...etc in Photoshop on my Mac OS!
The .gif files of these banners appear to TRIPLE in size when on the MAC (>150KB), but when transferred to windows; the real file size shows correctly! (<50KB)
It is not a result of the base2 vs base10 discrepancy since the difference in size is simply too big, and it only happens with files created on Photoshop on my Mac.
The reason I know that windows is showing the correct size while my Mac OS is displaying the wrong size, is that the file gets approved by google and yahoo ads, even though Mac OS shows that it surpasses the size limit (50KB) three times over!
This isn't an isolated incident either, all image files created in Photoshop on the MAC continue this weird behaviour! However, files downloaded from the net appear to be consistent on both operating systems!
One example is the attached screenshot:
Explanation, please??

Geez, sorry I offended you Mr. Jobs (incarnate)!
You came in here with a three ton chip on your shoulders. Did you really expect sunshine and puppies in return?
No, I expected useful help, and I got it from Jeffrey Jones. Thanks again Jeffrey!
I mean, when you move or upload it, it loses this data association anyways!
To a drive which doesn't support Apple's AB tree structure (NTFS, FAT, FAT32, exFAT), yes. To another HFS+ drive, no.
What about uploading the file to the cloud?? Does it lose this association or not?? And does anyone really care about the data in the Resource fork?
This "Resource Fork" means nothing to the file owner, only to the OS and the Drive. Therefore, it shouldn't be added to the total. Period. Because its not part of the file, its part of Apple's tree structure! This is really a simple concept, not sure why you are bending over backwords to defend a clearly stupid oversight from apple!
There's no reason to force me to use the command line to get the real file size of a GIF! There's just no excuse for that!
If an OS is saying it is fetching file size information for a single file, it should do exactly that! Not add hidden Resource Forks that are part of the OS's internal workings
OS X is fetching the file size. It's file size, not the way a different OS would report it.
There is no such thing as it's file size. A file size is a file size, accross all platforms, on the cloud, wherever!
A GIF file should have the same file size whether its on windows, linux, unix, darwin, freeBSD, or anything else. The only time its weight should vary is in outer space!
That is why I'm surprised that they are breaking simple UI Design rules.
The User Interface has nothing to do with the file structure of a drive.
I don't care about the structure of the drive!! Neither should you, neither should the average user!
A good UI should NOT concern the user with this! The average user doesn't care about these Resource Forks, and will never try to view them, therefore, there is no logical reason to add up their file sizes to the total size of each file, and then to make things worse, hide that fact! That only creates confusion, and it makes it so much harder for a designer like myself to view the REAL file sizes of my image files! Now, whenever I'm on my MAC, I will have to run command line scripts to be able to see if my GIF files (that I work on EVERYDAY) meet the file size quota, because Mac OS adds up hidden files that I have no use for and gives me the WRONG file size!
Let's say this again: when you select a file and click get info, you should get the info for the file you selcted. Nothing more, nothing less! I don't care if the file structure creates an entire colony of hidden files, they should be completely hidden to me, and if not, the Get Info dialog box should at least give me two sizes, one is the REAL file size, and the other is the added up file size for the Resource Fork as well (although I can't think of any good reason why it should add up the Resource Fork size anyways)!
do you think it is at all logical, that when you select 300 or so files, and click Get Info, that it open 300 windows at once each showing separate information for each file? Or does it make a lot more sense, intuitively, to get the total tally of all the files selected added up, without having to hold down shortcut keys when clicking them to do so?
Yes, it is logical because that's what you, the user, told the OS to do. You wanted the Get Info data on 300 individual items. I don't know about you, but I avoid the menu bar as much as possible (your reference to avoiding shortcut keys). Command+I will always give you singular Get Info dialogue boxes.
No, that's not what I told the OS to do. I selected 300 files cumulatively, therefore, I should get the cumulative info for all the selected files. That's just common sense. Every other OS seems to get this!
And I'm hard pressed to find anyone who has found a use for having 300 get info boxes open at the same time. Therefore, that shouldn't be the default.
Will you start defending apple's decision to stick with the one button mouse for all these years depriving us from the all important context menu as well?? There was absolutely no good reason to do that, just as there is absolutely no good reason to do this!

Empty File has to write after Message Processing in File Adapter..!!

Hi,
File to File Scenario.
Once the file is processed and placed in the receiver folder, I need to generate one empty file with the original file name but with different extension (DON). This is used to indicate that the full file is written in the folder.
Example:
Original file has to write like "Output_Final.CSV"
Empty file has to be placed like "Output_Final.DON"
Is there any way I can achieve this requirement.?
Thanks
Deepthi.

I have no clue of removing the same using Graphical mapping ..
I hope you have set the option of Write Empty File if not try this and still doesnot work
then need to look for java or ABAP mapping
chekc the below thread may help
Re: How to create empty Payload
Rajesh

RUN OPERATING SYSTEM COMMAND BEFORE MESSAGE PROCESSING

hi.
just i want to know what is the purpose of run operating system command before message processing,after message processing under file sender adapter.
waiting for your great answer.
bye.
regards.
seeta ram.

Hello Seeta,
let me see if I give it using a simple scenario that I implamented : i nedd to transfer a very large file from one server to the other by XI.
to save space and network traffic I use an OS command before picking up the file to run a zip command to zip the file.
after I transfer the file to the target server I run another OS command after the transfer to unzip the file.
now to your second question:
the before Os command on the target server is used mostly for checks (make sure there isn't a file by that name or backing up existing data)
and the after sender OS command is usualy for backing up or erasing existing files (cause it is done only after the first part was finished succesfully).
Uri Lifshitz.
p.s.
there was a blog obout this titled "XI as a huge file mover"
and you can see a description and my scripts at https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/wiki?path=/display/profile/2007/05/03/additionaltipsforusingXIasahugefiletransfer%28withbatchscripts%29&

Unusual Bug when creating pdf from image files

Hi I have a very mindboggling problem which I cant seem to get my head around.
basically I am trying to create a pdf using a large amount of image files, these images are scans of pages of a book. so I have been trying to create a pdf file from these images, and everytime i try, it all looks ok except for one page which comes up smaller in size than the rest which is a big problem and very unusual. If I change the view of acrobat so that it shows two pages at a time then this is clearly visable where one page is normal and the page next to it is like a third of the size. Ive checked the image file properties for that page and they are more or less the same as the rest, the dimensions of the image file too, but when I add it into a PDF it seems to shrink in size, any ideas as to why? any help would be much appreciated! (and I hope what I said made sense lol )
Thanks
Nav

Hi Davew000
Can you please tell the steps you are doing to create the PDF ?
Thanks,
Tanvi

Error message: incompatible image size when using IMAQ in image processing

I want to do low pass filter and convolution on an acquired image. When I connect the image to the VI, the message: incompatible image size appears. I have tried to set the border to 3 in IMAQ create, but it does not help. Anyone know how to solve this problem?

Hello,
Which particular VI is outputting this error? Did you try larger border sizes (5,7)? What is the exact error code and error string?
Regards,
Yusuf C.
Applications Engineering
National Instruments

Error message: incompatible image size when using IMAQ in image processing

I want to do low pass filter and convolution on an acquired image. When I connect the image to the VI, the message: incompatible image size appears. I have tried to set the border to 3 in IMAQ create, but it does not help. Anyone know how to solve this problem?

A couple things might be causing this problem-
1) The convolution matrix is bigger than 7x7, or
2) You have created an image, but there is not yet anything in the buffer
You can check number 2 by doing a winDraw window just before you do the convolution.

I'm trying to process RAW file images from my SanDisk memory card on Adobe Photoshop CS4 Extended and am unable to do so. Which level Adobe Photoshop do I need to process SanDisk images?

I'm trying to process RAW images from my new SanDisk Ultra memory card and unable to do so. I'm currently using Adobe Photoshop CS4 Extended, is this the right one or do I need to update?

…and you absolutely have to specify the camera model that generated those raw image files.
2.—There's no such thing as "SanDisk images"
3,— BOILERPLATE TEXT:
Due to the current unavailability of clairvoyants and mind-readers in the forum, we respectfully request you supply sensible, complete details.
If you give complete and detailed information about your setup and the issue at hand,
such as your platform (Mac or Win),
exact versions of your OS, of Photoshop (not just "CS6", but something like CS6v.13.0.6) and of Bridge,
your settings in Photoshop > Preference > Performance
the type of file you were working on,
machine specs, such as total installed RAM, scratch file HDs, total available HD space, video card specs, including total VRAM installed,
what troubleshooting steps you have taken so far,
what error message(s) you receive,
if having issues opening raw files also the exact camera make and model that generated them,
if you're having printing issues, indicate the exact make and model of your printer, paper size, image dimensions in pixels (so many pixels wide by so many pixels high). if going through a RIP, specify that too.
A screen shot of your settings or of the image could be very helpful too,
etc.,
someone may be able to help you (not necessarily this poster, who is not a Windows user).
Please read this FAQ for advice on how to ask your questions correctly for quicker and better answers:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/419981?tstart=0
Thanks!

Downloaded Appleworks 6.2.9 for Mac Updater-2.sim but when i try to open the file i receive the message "legacy image should be updated". what does this mean and/or entail?

downloaded Appleworks 6.2.9 for Mac Updater-2.sim but when i try to open the file i receive the message "legacy image should be updated". what does this mean and/or entail?

Mavericks is not recognizing the .smi extension - on my Mac it thinks it's a RealPlayer document. You are not going to be able to do anything with this - it requires AppleWorks to be present to be updated, and you can't run AppleWorks on Mavericks (other than by the rather roundabout process of installing Snow Leopard Server in Parallels and installing AppleWorks on that, as described here).

Reducing file size in batch processes (multiple files)

I am now using a canon XTi 10.5 megapixel camera. I'm loving it, taking tons and pics, and see my memory on my computer shrinking rapidly. I'm not too worried about hard drive space as I can simply buy another hard drive. Where I'm running into problems is on my iPod. I have an 80gb video iPod. It is suddenly full, Almost 1/2 with audio, 1/2 with photos. I'm realizing that I need take the 5-7 megabyte files each (photos) in iPhoto and reduce them down a bit in dimensions and/or jpeg compression.
I use photoshop elements and am familiar with the multiple files option. I've used that a bit, nice feature.
Heres my question:
I know iPhoto is sensitive to manipulation of photos/changes if the changes aren't done through its interface. How can I go about taking the original pics for a number of events (talking about perhaps 2000 pics right now) and batch process them down in size a bit without weirding out iPhoto?
Does iPhoto have an option to batch change files in such a fashion? Is it as simple as finding the originals in the finder and simpy reducing them in size and making iPhoto update its thumbnails?
and how do I make iPhoto update its thumbnails, I forget...
Thanks

If you just want displayable image files on the iPod and not the full sized files then a very good solution, IMO, is to export those photos you want on the iPod to a folder on the Desktop. Then use Resize! to batch change the pixel dimension and the jpg compression level of the files. For my iPod Nano I use 640 x 480 and have Resize! compress them to medium. That gives me files in the 100 KB size range. If you want a smaller file just increase the compressions level a bit. Resize! automatically creates a new folder for the resized images so you can try different levels on the same folder. You can get a lot of photos on your iPod at that size. I then put that folder of resized files in my Pictures folder and have iTunes use it instead of using iPhoto.
Do you Twango?
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 08 libraries. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

Why is image file size getting inflated by Pages?

I have a newsletter I am creating, and I have inserted 6 photos. They have been pre-downsized using Image Ready, so each image is around 30k. But after they have been inserted, the file size of the entire Pages document is huge. So I opened the Package for the document (Control click on the icon) and I see that now the images are each around 300k. The images have not been manipulated in Pages, no shadows or strokes. They have been resized just a teeny bit (made smaller in all cases).
So what is going on to cause this huge inflation of file size. It is making my document too big to email (although it has helped to control the pdf export to "Good"... or even better to use the Color Sync file size reduction dialog, which is buried so deep in the Print dialog that I can't believe this is a common way to do it...)
Anyway, all help would be appreciated. Thanks, Peter

yes, you are right that the best results that I got were from the Print command and the color sync option to reduce file size. Without that, I took a Pages doc that was around 2.7megs and the pdf varied from 1.8-2.5 using the export command. With the color sync method I did get it down to a 450k pdf, which I am satisfied with.
Still it baffles me that a 40k jpeg will inflate to 300k in Pages. I don't see multiple copies in the Package for the document, so I don't think it is multiplying. And I think that at least one of the images lives in the document without having been resized from within Pages, so that doesn't seem to be involved.
I am using jpegs, adjusting them in Photoshop and then optimizing them with Image Ready, but they are JPEGs all thru the process, and they clearly are averaging around 35-40k after Image Ready does it's t hing. That is the whole purpose of Image Ready, it comes with Photoshop with that intention solely. I could try saving the image file in Preview or some other program and seeing if it inflates liek the Image REady jpegs do.
Anyway, I am still curiouis about why this happens, but I can live with the rather bizarre method of using the Print>Color Sych method.
Thanks to all of you for your help, really,
Peter

Image size problem after converting from Managed files to Referenced files.

I recently moved to Referenced files for all my images. I use a plug-in (Graphic Converter 8.8.2) to resize all images to a consistent size (1440 pixels wide, landsacpe format) for a web app that I use (Sandvox). With Referenced files, when I drag and drop the externally processed image, it shows up at exactly one-half the correct size (720 pixels). As a test, doing exactly the same opeartion with an Aperture library utilizing managed files, there is no problem...it works as expected.
As a temproray work-around, I found that instead of dragging and dropping, I use the Aperture Export function, everything is correct. This is not really what I want to do because I have a lot of images to process.
This is Aperture 3.5 and Mavericks, but the problem was there with with Aperture 3.4 and OS 10.7.5.

Thank you for the suggestion and running the test. I changed the Preview settings to 1440, and then 2560 and finally, Don't Limit. Quit and relaunch Aperture between each setting. No luck.
But you gave me a hint: maybe the problem has to do with the images being first Managed and then moved to Referenced files. So I tried one that has never been a Managed file and everything works correctly! Don't know if this is a bug or a feature.
Mystery solved, but I still have a lot of images to reprocess.
Thank you for the help.

Size of XI messages processing image files

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for