[erlang-questions] log_mf_h and rb do not handle terms over 65k

[Kenneth Lundin]

Yes, a backwards compatible patch which truncates the term or replaces
it with "term too big"
has very good chances to be accepted. Provided of course that it is submitted
according to the instructions on Github.

/Kenneth, Erlang/OTP Ericsson

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Garret Smith <garret.smith@REDACTED> wrote:
> Would the PTB be more willing to accept a backwards compatible patch that
> either truncates the term or replaces it with a "Term too big" message?
>
> I would be happy to create one if there is a good chance of it being accepted.
>
> -Garret Smith
>
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Jesper Louis Andersen
> <jesper.louis.andersen@REDACTED> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Garret Smith <garret.smith@REDACTED> wrote:
>>> I was logging a couple very large terms using
>>> error_logger:info_report and log_mf_h during application start,
>>> and was always unable to read most of the first log file
>>> generated.  This was mystifying me for a while until I finally
>>> traced the source.
>>>
>>> log_mf_h and rb use a 2-byte length indicator for the term they
>>> are about to read/write, therefore they cannot handle terms
>>> over 65,536 bytes in length.  See handle_event/2 in log_mf_h
>>> and read_report/1 in rb
>>
>> Yes, etorrent has the same problem for some of its processes. I
>> reported this little problem a couple of years ago, and even did the
>> backwards-incompatible patch against R11b-5 to fix it:
>>
>> http://www.erlang.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi/3/187
>>
>> --
>> J.
>>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> To unsubscribe; mailto:erlang-questions-unsubscribe@REDACTED
>
>