There are zero limitations on the filesystem. Maybe the deployment is missing a system library and therefore is unable to untar the file?

The same containers work just fine in Google Cloud run but don't in railway. Was hoping to understand what's missing on the railway side as it still seems buggy at times (volumes not allowed in certain locations, ui kicks you out or all options for creating new projects not available, etc). Are these documented anywhere or you just find out when using it?

volumes not allowed in certain locations
yeah railway prevents you from mounting to system paths

ui kicks you out or all options for creating new projects not available
never seen this before, mind sharing some screenshots / screen recordings?

i have done "untaring" on railway both in code and with the tar cli, no issues, unfortunaly it works elsewhere does not rule out code issues.

the error triggered comes when using rust:
https://docs.rs/tar/latest/src/tar/entry.rs.html#658-661
Is it the railway architecture?
are you with railway?

may i ask why im seeing mention of .py files?

Is it the railway architecture?
nope

are you with railway?
nope

oh, was hoping they could take a look at the projectid

it's rust, the error comes from that section

what are the .py files for, is this rust or python?

can i see your rust code for where this is erroring

oh wait, you are using a python wrapped library

that is an issue with the way their bindings work

you looking at the project?

neither of us work for railway

lol, do the railway folks ever stop by?
why python are you looking at?

they do, if this was a platform issue

that's the question, I guess

haha the answer being this isnt a platform issue

how would you know if you haven't seen the project?

as mentioned, i have untared files on railway in the past without issues

respectfully, that doesn't prove this case is the same as those, people thought it was python

this is not an issue with railway

this is an issue with the library you are using

are you using a dockerfile? maybe try a different runtime image

agree with milo

railway is great but right now is only suitable for dev loads or hobby projects, but they're getting there. I mean they didn't even have volumes before. Which is why I gave it another try

I think it could be either way, just can't be certain without having all the info though

are you using nixpacks?

or a dockerfile

railway runs a whole lot of business class users and helps them scale, that take is simply incorrect

a docker image

okay, what is the runtime image?

it's not public, it's an EE version

is it based on distroless? alpine? ubuntu?

the library might not work on that

it works on cloud run, running prod there, was just trying to test out railway

ARG DEBIANIMAGE=debian:bookworm-slim ARG RUSTIMAGE=rust:1.76-slim-bookworm
ARG PYTHON_IMAGE=python:3.11.8-slim-bookworm

FROM ${DEBIAN_IMAGE} as nsjail

do you guys know if the limitations are listed somewhere?

• unallowed locations for volumes

• no volumes for replicas

• architectures supported
  etc

> unallowed locations for volumes
system paths, i dont have a list unfortunaly

> no volumes for replicas

> architectures supported
amd64

a'ight, thanks for the info