Fixes POSDI error #1873
Fixes POSDI error #1873
Conversation
POSDI index error fix for spade deals
|
@cryptowhizzard could you explain what the fix here is? Apart from DEBUG lines, I am not sure I see any changes to the current version of the code. Thanks! |
|
That is a very good question. It's probably because we query the Filesize etc. I was debugging and looking why I got an EOF error running PODSI on some of the spade deals , but that is gone now and they are indexed. So we are well on our way to finding the next bug , probably in RPC with lotus miner or something. Anyway , I will ask Stuberman on slack to check if these deals do now pass and index with this patch and keep you updated. He experienced the same problem. |
| } else { | ||
| log.Debugw("File size", "size", fileSize) | ||
| } | ||
| _, err = file.Seek(0, io.SeekStart) // Return the file pointer to the start |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't we set the seeker back to the start of the segment index offset same as line 422? The current code would work for 32 GiB files but might be problematic for smaller deals.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am merging this to another branch so I can refactor the code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, dsis is kind of important for the parseDataSegmentIndex usage below, 0 is not a good idea here
* Fixes POSDI error (#1873) POSDI index error fix for spade deals * refactor the io.seek --------- Co-authored-by: CryptoWhizzard <[email protected]>
POSDI index error fix for spade deals