Bug 135419 - Apache 2.0 cannot handle files > 2GB
Summary: Apache 2.0 cannot handle files > 2GB
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3
Classification: Red Hat
Component: httpd (Show other bugs)
(Show other bugs)
Version: 3.0
Hardware: i386 Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Joe Orton
QA Contact:
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2004-10-12 16:39 UTC by Ian Soboroff
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:07 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2004-10-12 16:45:53 UTC
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Ian Soboroff 2004-10-12 16:39:21 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3)

Description of problem:
Files larger than 2GB won't show up in an autoindex directory listing.
 If I try to retrieve the file using its explicit URL, I get the
following error message:

(75)Value too large for defined data type: access to [whatever
filename] failed

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Put a file larger than 2GB in a directory
2. Set 'Options +Indexes' on that directory
3. Don't see the file.

Actual Results:  The large file does not appear in the directory listing

Expected Results:  You should see the file

Additional info:

I suspect that Apache needs to be build with O_LARGEFILE.  This bug
may be fixed in a later Apache version, as well... I could not confirm
this last.

Comment 1 Joe Orton 2004-10-12 16:45:53 UTC
Thanks for the report.

Unfortunately, Apache httpd 2.0 does not have large file support, so
on 32-bit platforms, files larger than 2Gb cannot be served.  Adding
large file support breaks the binary module interface, so this cannot
be done in a stable release series such as 2.0.x.

We have fixed the problem upstream for the future httpd 2.2 releases,
so this issue will be fixed in a future version of RHEL.

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