RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1492157 - [RFE] tarfile: add an option to change the "blocking factor"
Summary: [RFE] tarfile: add an option to change the "blocking factor"
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: python
Version: 7.4
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Python Maintainers
QA Contact: BaseOS QE - Apps
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1480039
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2017-09-15 15:52 UTC by Simone Tiraboschi
Modified: 2018-08-02 13:36 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-08-02 13:36:19 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Python 31774 0 None None None 2017-10-12 14:17:45 UTC

Description Simone Tiraboschi 2017-09-15 15:52:24 UTC
Description of problem:
According to tar man page:

Device blocking:
       -b, --blocking-factor=BLOCKS
              BLOCKS x 512 bytes per record

and tar will read and write entire records.

According to tarfile documentation,

tarfile.open(name=None, mode=’r’, fileobj=None, bufsize=10240, **kwargs)
...
bufsize specifies the blocksize and defaults to 20 * 512 bytes

but if I try creating an archive specifying a different blocking factor, tarfile simply ignores and keeps 10240.

The issue can be easily reproduced with this snippet:

    import os
    import tarfile
    import tempfile
    
    EXPECTED_SIZE = 20480
    tempdir = tempfile.gettempdir()
    fd, _tmp_tar = tempfile.mkstemp(
        suffix='.tar',
        dir=tempdir,
    )
    os.close(fd)
    tar = tarfile.open(name=_tmp_tar, mode='w', bufsize=EXPECTED_SIZE)
    tar.close()
    statinfo = os.stat(_tmp_tar)
    if statinfo.st_size != EXPECTED_SIZE:
        raise RuntimeError((
            'Archive size doens\'t match expected size: '
            'actual {a} - expected {e}'
        ).format(
            a=statinfo.st_size,
            e=EXPECTED_SIZE,
        ))


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


How reproducible:
python-libs-2.7.5-58.el7.x86_64

Steps to Reproduce:
1. try creating an archive with a custom blocking factor
2.
3.

Actual results:
tarfile.open ignores and keeps 10240 (the default value)

Expected results:
tarfile.open honors the custom blocking factor

Additional info:

    tar --blocking-factor=40 -cf test.tar -T /dev/null

works as expected creating an empty tar archive of 20480 (40x512) bytes.

Comment 2 Petr Viktorin (pviktori) 2017-10-05 13:41:46 UTC
This is on our radar but we're not sure if we can fit investigating it in the 7.5 devel phase.
Let me know if this is higher priority.

Comment 5 Petr Viktorin (pviktori) 2018-04-11 10:18:44 UTC
This is still low priority, let us know if it needs attention now.

Comment 6 Petr Viktorin (pviktori) 2018-06-07 14:16:57 UTC
Victor, this is low priority, but one of the things that could use a core dev's attention.

Comment 7 Victor Stinner 2018-06-20 13:06:34 UTC
Sadly, in Python, it's not possible to configure the blocking factor. The bufsize parameter is just an optimization for internal data copies, it's unrelated to the blocking factor. I updated the upstream issue as a feature request: https://bugs.python.org/issue31774

Comment 9 Petr Viktorin (pviktori) 2018-08-02 13:36:19 UTC
We will not fix this in Python 2.
Please re-open if that's a problem.


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