mirror of
https://github.com/simstudioai/sim.git
synced 2026-09-24 15:45:35 +08:00
Waleed
ec3156f1bc
* fix(files): count the document body against the export limit The 250 MB export cap measured only the embedded assets' declared sizes. The markdown body was downloaded with no limit and never counted, so a large document with modest attachments cleared the check and still produced a zip well over the stated limit, materialized whole in memory. The body is the largest single entry in most bundles, so excluding it left the limit unenforced against the item most able to exceed it. It is now capped on read and counted alongside its assets, and the message names both. Follow-up to #5995, which introduced the asset caps without extending them to the body. * test(v1): cover the file download's rendered-bytes behavior The route had no tests, and #5995 changed what it serves: rendered bytes, the resolved content type rather than the record's source MIME, Content-Length from the rendered length, and a retryable 409 while an artifact compiles. One test pins the filename/content-type relationship. A review flagged the download as naming a rendered file with a source extension, but the renderer picks its output format from the file name — getE2BDocFormat and COMPILABLE_FORMATS both key on it — so a .docx renders to a docx and the two cannot disagree. The test makes that argument executable rather than a comment. * fix(files): report an oversized document body as a size rejection Capping the body read meant an oversized document threw PayloadSizeLimitError, which nothing caught, so the caller got a generic 500 — hiding the very limit message the cap was added to produce. It now returns the same 400 as the bundle check, naming the export limit. * chore(files): drop the unreachable export asset-count cap extractEmbeddedFileRefs stops collecting at MAX_EMBEDDED_IMAGES, so the list this route receives is already bounded before it arrives and the count check could never fire. Its test only passed because it mocked the extractor, so it asserted a branch production cannot reach. The byte ceilings are the real bound and stay. A comment records where the count is actually enforced, so the next reader does not add a second one.