Last modified: 2012-12-13 17:19:03 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T21696, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 19696 - Uploaded image present blank 8192 byte sections
Uploaded image present blank 8192 byte sections
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Product: Wikimedia
Classification: Unclassified
General/Unknown (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Normal critical (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Tim Starling
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fil...
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2009-07-13 13:14 UTC by Platonides
Modified: 2012-12-13 17:19 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Platonides 2009-07-13 13:14:50 UTC
[[File:Gogh, Vincent van - Memory of the Garden at Etten (Ladies of Arles).jpg]] was uploaded this morning. The server has it corrupt. Filesize (95.674.940) is correct but sha1 (9bde05a09121148a38c2dcd9b8295a4ca7caa760) is not (should have been ae7b210f9ef765f167fa5c89e3bf460e1be7aa66).

The stored image contains 5 blocks of 8192 bytes of blank content (filled with \0s).
 232000- 234000
187A000-187C000
18A6000-18A8000
1EE0000-1EE2000
1EE6000-1EE8000

Obviously, all of these had data in the original one.

I know we're having problems with filesystem disk space. Rejecting the upload for that would be acceptable, but this is not.

I suspect the bug lies at NFS or ZFS.

Marking as critical since this involves data loss.
Comment 1 Brion Vibber 2009-07-13 16:42:46 UTC
That's an interesting failure mode... blocks of 0s sounds like NFS borkage to me.

(Actually, double-checking the file save on upload by checking the sha-1 hash might not be an awful idea.)
Comment 2 Rob Lanphier 2011-12-22 01:02:51 UTC
This should be fixed by Swift, if it's even still happening (which maybe it isn't)
Comment 3 Andre Klapper 2012-12-13 17:19:03 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> This should be fixed by Swift, if it's even still happening

Changing to WORKSFORME to get rid of deprecated LATER in this case.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links