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

v1.1.0-beta1: juicefs info failed on large file #3846

Closed
anglelLAQ opened this issue Jun 21, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #3850
Closed

v1.1.0-beta1: juicefs info failed on large file #3846

anglelLAQ opened this issue Jun 21, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #3850
Assignees
Labels
kind/bug Something isn't working
Milestone

Comments

@anglelLAQ
Copy link

anglelLAQ commented Jun 21, 2023

What happened:

v1.1.0-beta1 社区版 juicefs 的 info 命令查询 大文件(50G)报错,具体如下:
执行命令
报错截图

报错文件所在路径的dump结果如下:
dump结果

What you expected to happen:

How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible):

Anything else we need to know?

Environment:

  • JuiceFS version (use juicefs --version) or Hadoop Java SDK version:
  • Cloud provider or hardware configuration running JuiceFS:
  • OS (e.g cat /etc/os-release):
  • Kernel (e.g. uname -a):
  • Object storage (cloud provider and region, or self maintained):
  • Metadata engine info (version, cloud provider managed or self maintained):
  • Network connectivity (JuiceFS to metadata engine, JuiceFS to object storage):
  • Others:
@anglelLAQ anglelLAQ added the kind/bug Something isn't working label Jun 21, 2023
@davies davies changed the title v1.1.0-beta1 社区版 juicefs 的 info 命令查询 大文件信息报错 v1.1.0-beta1: juicefs info fail on large file Jun 22, 2023
@davies davies changed the title v1.1.0-beta1: juicefs info fail on large file v1.1.0-beta1: juicefs info failed on large file Jun 22, 2023
@davies davies added this to the Release 1.1 milestone Jun 22, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants