Fix encodeBase64 not handling uint8 arrays beyond ~100kB#150
Open
refi93 wants to merge 1 commit intopolybase:mainfrom
Open
Fix encodeBase64 not handling uint8 arrays beyond ~100kB#150refi93 wants to merge 1 commit intopolybase:mainfrom
refi93 wants to merge 1 commit intopolybase:mainfrom
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation: When I was trying to upload bigger data to polybase it was failing with a
RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceededwhich turned out to be caused by theencodeBase64()function which apparently wasn't able to handle data bigger than ~100kB.This PR reimplements the
encodeBase64()in a safer way which works with bigger arrays without issues, even beyond 1MB - not sure if there's an upper bound (in practice I expect that code to be too slow/blocking for files larger than several MB), I guess a proper solution for bigger data would be to stream/chunk it somehow which would require designing a whole new API call, nevertheless, this solution is an improvement respective to the current implementation and it was already enough for my usecasemore info on the issue e.g. here: mathiasbynens/base64#13
How to test: Try creating a colletion with a buffer field containing a data item of more than 100kB: