Misleading implementation of minio-java:putObject

[kannappanr]

Copying the contents of the issue minio/minio#7053 as this issue belongs to this repo.

putObject should take an OutputStream and not an InputStream. It works ok with IS, but it is not very professional (and misleading). In addition the SDK doc does not mention that one should close the IS (as it is done for getObject).

[harshavardhana]

@marcadella your understanding here is incorrect

putObject takes an InputStream because it needs a Reader not OutputStream which is a Writer, other implementations of similar APIs are in aws-sdk-java

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSJavaSDK/latest/javadoc/com/amazonaws/services/s3/AmazonS3Client.html#putObject-java.lang.String-java.lang.String-java.io.InputStream-com.amazonaws.services.s3.model.ObjectMetadata-

public PutObjectResult putObject(String bucketName,
                                 String key,
                                 InputStream input,
                                 ObjectMetadata metadata)
                          throws SdkClientException,
                                 AmazonServiceException

Also not all InputStreams need to be closed, for getObject, we indicate that because its an HTTP connection and it should be closed. For putObject InputStream can be your custom implementation too and may not require explicit close()

As a developer it is up to you to decide what you plan to do with the InputStream Reader, if your InputStream requires close() you should close. We are not planning to document InputStream behavior in our SDK which is already fairly documented in Java SDK docs on which InputStream requires a close and which doesn't.

[harshavardhana]

Moving this as not an issue, can be closed.

[marcadella]

Ok I saw AWS is using InputStream as well, my bad. Thanks for the quick answer and sorry if I was a bit rude.

[kannappanr]

@marcadella No problem. Closing the issue based on the comments above.