Skip to content

Crashes after upgrading to 5.3.0 #23955

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
lancemind opened this issue Apr 6, 2017 · 6 comments
Closed

Crashes after upgrading to 5.3.0 #23955

lancemind opened this issue Apr 6, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

@lancemind
Copy link

lancemind commented Apr 6, 2017

Elasticsearch version:
{
"name" : "MkZ0lPb",
"cluster_name" : "elasticsearch",
"cluster_uuid" : "t_EwPLkSRDWMrUAcaae9Uw",
"version" : {
"number" : "5.3.0",
"build_hash" : "3adb13b",
"build_date" : "2017-03-23T03:31:50.652Z",
"build_snapshot" : false,
"lucene_version" : "6.4.1"
},
"tagline" : "You Know, for Search"
}
Plugins installed: [
searchguard-5.3.0-11
S3
]

JVM version:
java version "1.8.0_121"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_121-b13)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.121-b13, mixed mode)

OS version:
Linux 3.13.0-112-generic #159-Ubuntu SMP Fri Mar 3 15:26:07 UTC 2017 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64
GNU/Linux
Description of the problem including expected versus actual behavior:
Upgraded to 5.3.0 today @ 12:00 PST and have had ES crash twice. Logs with stack trace attached.

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Upgrade to ES 5.3.0

Provide logs (if relevant):
elasticsearch.log.gz

Describe the feature:

@jasontedor
Copy link
Member

There's nowhere near enough information to reproduce this. Also, please remove Search Guard and see if the issue still reproduces as we will want a minimal reproduction anyway.

Since Elastic prefers to use GitHub only for verified bug reports and feature requests, I'm going to close this issue. If you need help digging through this, you can try the forum.

@floragunn
Copy link

java.lang.StackOverflowError within java.util.regex.Pattern in bulk thread, this indeed looks like a bug (either in ES or in Search Guard)

[2017-04-06T20:10:15,489][ERROR][o.e.b.ElasticsearchUncaughtExceptionHandler] [] fatal error in thread [elasticsearch[MkZ0lPb][bulk][T#1]], exiting
java.lang.StackOverflowError: null
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$GroupHead.match(Pattern.java:4658) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$Loop.match(Pattern.java:4785) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$GroupTail.match(Pattern.java:4717) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$BranchConn.match(Pattern.java:4568) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$CharProperty.match(Pattern.java:3777) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$Branch.match(Pattern.java:4604) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$GroupHead.match(Pattern.java:4658) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$Loop.match(Pattern.java:4785) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$GroupTail.match(Pattern.java:4717) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$BranchConn.match(Pattern.java:4568) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$CharProperty.match(Pattern.java:3777) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$Branch.match(Pattern.java:4604) ~[?:1.8.0_121]
	at java.util.regex.Pattern$GroupHead.match(Pattern.java:4658) ~[?:1.8.0_121]

Maybe related to #22812

@jimczi
Copy link
Contributor

jimczi commented Apr 7, 2017

this indeed looks like a bug (either in ES or in Search Guard)

@floragunncom without a clear reproducible case we can't help you.
As @jasontedor suggested check first if disabling SearchGuard eliminates the problem.

@jasontedor
Copy link
Member

I have a hunch what caused this. I think it's due to excessive backtracking from the regular expression used to extract warning values when de-duplicating warning headers and this was addressed by #24114. If you upgrade to 5.3.1, you should see this issue is fixed (if not, then it means you're experiencing a different issue).

@floragunn
Copy link

I came up with that idea three weeks ago ;-)

@jasontedor
Copy link
Member

I don't understand what you're saying? The logs clearly have a stack overflow, the issue was where they were coming from, not that there was a stack overflow?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants