Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Option to send base64 input stream through storeScu #42

Open
1443658 opened this issue Jul 22, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Option to send base64 input stream through storeScu #42

1443658 opened this issue Jul 22, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@1443658
Copy link

1443658 commented Jul 22, 2022

Hi, really appreciate your effort on this project, it is great and easy to use.
I saw in storeScp there is an option to send via buffer as base64(writeFile = false),
just wonder is there a way to send this base64 buffer through storeScu?
Thanks so much for the help!

@knopkem
Copy link
Owner

knopkem commented Jul 22, 2022

Hi, for storeScp setting storeOnly and writeFile does the following change: instead of automatically let the storeScp store the received DICOM files it passes the buffer (base64 encoded) of each file to the callback. This can be useful in certain scenarios e.g. where the files are directly processed.
For storeScu it would be the other way around, the files that should be transferred would be passed as base64 buffer array. Sending file by file is very inefficient via store scu (in general) so having the option to batch send is important I think.
I do think that this can be useful and should be easy to implement. Do you have a specific use-case for it?

@1443658
Copy link
Author

1443658 commented Jul 25, 2022

Well actually my app is acting like a proxy which receives dicom file from one side (storeScp), then send it out to another side(storeScu).
So I am wondering if it is possible that when storeScp callback has that file buffer, I can directly send that base64 encoded buffer out using storeScu function without any physical files during the whole process.
Thanks again for your help!

@knopkem
Copy link
Owner

knopkem commented Aug 2, 2022

Ok, thanks for the explanation. I'll see if I find the time to implement this as this sounds easy and helpful.
However it sounds like this would not be very efficient as you would send each single file out to the receiver (image level store is usually slow due to the handshake overhead). I will try to allow an array of base64 encoded files so you could buffer a bit in memory. Will let you know. Cheers.

@knopkem
Copy link
Owner

knopkem commented Jan 30, 2024

@1443658 Is this feature still needed? Could implement it now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants