Scaling up image causes 'body size is too long' error

[lithiumoxide]

Hi,

I have a 3.1MB image measuring 2353x1956px (stored in S3). The Lambda function successfully requests an upscaled (2356x1988) version image (returning a 200 status code) but then throws a body size is too long message. When requesting scaled down images, there does not seem to be any errors.

The requesting URL is:

• https://redacted/2356x1988/path/to/image/file.jpg

I've also tried:

• https://redacted/fit-in/2356x1988/path/to/image/file.jpg
• https://redacted/fit-in/2356x1988/filters:upscale()/path/to/image/file.jpg

My Lambda function has a 10 second timeout and has a large memory allocation of ~1.5GB.

Would appreciate any thoughts or advice.

Conor

[hayesry]

Hey @lithiumoxide, the "body size is too long" message is a known issue and is typically thrown when the resulting image exceeds the Lambda payload limit of 6 MB. The upscaling might cause the output image to exceed this limit and throw the message you've been seeing.

We've added a workaround to our feature backlog for this solution that could allow users to output images to an S3 bucket of their choice (i.e. a bucket named 'output-images') which would circumvent the payload limit, but don't have an exact ETA for implementation yet. Hope this helps!

[beomseoklee]

We are closing this issue, but please feel free to open the issue again if you any other support.

[arvesolland]

Are there currently any way of getting the image handler to work with large images? Im getting errors on large files > 7MB + on all other browsers than Chrome.

Is there a workaround that would allow the generated file to be output into S3 and return the url instead?

[mzahidriaz]

Still facing the same issue with Image greater than 5MB,
can we get a workaround for this one? or do we need to restrict users to only upload images below certain file size?

[hoantran-it]

Hey @lithiumoxide, the "body size is too long" message is a known issue and is typically thrown when the resulting image exceeds the Lambda payload limit of 6 MB. The upscaling might cause the output image to exceed this limit and throw the message you've been seeing.

We've added a workaround to our feature backlog for this solution that could allow users to output images to an S3 bucket of their choice (i.e. a bucket named 'output-images') which would circumvent the payload limit, but don't have an exact ETA for implementation yet. Hope this helps!

Hey @hayesry any update on this one, thank you!