Fail shard when index service/mappings fails to instantiate #10283
Conversation
This file contains 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
When the index service (which holds shards) fails to be created as a result of a shard being allocated on a node, we should fail the relevant shard, otherwise, it will remain stuck. Same goes when there is a failure to process updated mappings form the master. Note, both failures typically happen when the node is misconfigured (i.e. missing plugins, ...), since they get created and processed on the master node before being published. closes elastic#10283
kimchy
force-pushed
the
fail_shard_on_index_creation_failure
branch
from
597b7bd
to
3f5ffbe
Compare
| logger.warn("[{}] failed to create index for shard {}", e, indexMetaData.index(), shard.shardId()); | ||
| failedShards.put(shard.shardId(), new FailedShard(shard.version())); | ||
| shardStateAction.shardFailed(shard, indexMetaData.getUUID(), | ||
| "failed to create index to allocated shard " + shard.shardId() + ", failure " + ExceptionsHelper.detailedMessage(e), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think "allocated" should be "allocate" here.
|
Left one comment about grammar, but LGTM otherwise |
|
@dakrone thanks for the review, updated the log message, will wait for another review |
| } catch (Exception e) { | ||
| logger.warn("[{}] failed to create index", e, indexMetaData.index()); | ||
| } catch (Throwable e) { | ||
| logger.warn("[{}] failed to create index for shard {}", e, indexMetaData.index(), shard.shardId()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does it make sense to put the "fail a shard" logic under a method? to make sure we don't forget to put it in failedShards etc.
|
Change LGTM2 - left some comments regarding logging and error reporting |
|
+1 on getting this into 1.5.1 |
|
@bleskes pushed another round, review? |
|
LGTM again. nice clean up. |
kimchy
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 27, 2015
When the index service (which holds shards) fails to be created as a result of a shard being allocated on a node, we should fail the relevant shard, otherwise, it will remain stuck. Same goes when there is a failure to process updated mappings form the master. Note, both failures typically happen when the node is misconfigured (i.e. missing plugins, ...), since they get created and processed on the master node before being published. closes #10283
kimchy
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 27, 2015
When the index service (which holds shards) fails to be created as a result of a shard being allocated on a node, we should fail the relevant shard, otherwise, it will remain stuck. Same goes when there is a failure to process updated mappings form the master. Note, both failures typically happen when the node is misconfigured (i.e. missing plugins, ...), since they get created and processed on the master node before being published. closes #10283
bleskes
added a commit
to bleskes/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2015
…eerRecovery Fails due to elastic#10283
bleskes
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2015
…eerRecovery Fails due to #10283
bleskes
added a commit
to bleskes/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 30, 2015
After processing mapping updates from the master, we compare the resulting binary representation of them and compare it the one cluster state has. If different, we send a refresh mapping request to master, asking it to reparse the mapping and serialize them again. This mechanism is used to update the mapping after a format change caused by a version upgrade. The very same process can also be triggered when an old master leaves the cluster, triggering a local cluster state update. If that update contains old mapping format, the local node will again signal the need to refresh, but this time there is no master to accept the request. Instead of failing (which we now do because of elastic#10283, we should just skip the notification and wait for the next elected master to publish a new mapping (triggering another refresh if needed).
bleskes
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 30, 2015
After processing mapping updates from the master, we compare the resulting binary representation of them and compare it the one cluster state has. If different, we send a refresh mapping request to master, asking it to reparse the mapping and serialize them again. This mechanism is used to update the mapping after a format change caused by a version upgrade. The very same process can also be triggered when an old master leaves the cluster, triggering a local cluster state update. If that update contains old mapping format, the local node will again signal the need to refresh, but this time there is no master to accept the request. Instead of failing (which we now do because of #10283, we should just skip the notification and wait for the next elected master to publish a new mapping (triggering another refresh if needed). Closes #10311
bleskes
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 30, 2015
After processing mapping updates from the master, we compare the resulting binary representation of them and compare it the one cluster state has. If different, we send a refresh mapping request to master, asking it to reparse the mapping and serialize them again. This mechanism is used to update the mapping after a format change caused by a version upgrade. The very same process can also be triggered when an old master leaves the cluster, triggering a local cluster state update. If that update contains old mapping format, the local node will again signal the need to refresh, but this time there is no master to accept the request. Instead of failing (which we now do because of #10283, we should just skip the notification and wait for the next elected master to publish a new mapping (triggering another refresh if needed). Closes #10311
bleskes
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 30, 2015
After processing mapping updates from the master, we compare the resulting binary representation of them and compare it the one cluster state has. If different, we send a refresh mapping request to master, asking it to reparse the mapping and serialize them again. This mechanism is used to update the mapping after a format change caused by a version upgrade. The very same process can also be triggered when an old master leaves the cluster, triggering a local cluster state update. If that update contains old mapping format, the local node will again signal the need to refresh, but this time there is no master to accept the request. Instead of failing (which we now do because of #10283, we should just skip the notification and wait for the next elected master to publish a new mapping (triggering another refresh if needed). Closes #10311
clintongormley
added
the
:Distributed/Recovery
mute
pushed a commit
to mute/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 29, 2015
When the index service (which holds shards) fails to be created as a result of a shard being allocated on a node, we should fail the relevant shard, otherwise, it will remain stuck. Same goes when there is a failure to process updated mappings form the master. Note, both failures typically happen when the node is misconfigured (i.e. missing plugins, ...), since they get created and processed on the master node before being published. closes elastic#10283
mute
pushed a commit
to mute/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 29, 2015
…eerRecovery Fails due to elastic#10283
mute
pushed a commit
to mute/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 29, 2015
After processing mapping updates from the master, we compare the resulting binary representation of them and compare it the one cluster state has. If different, we send a refresh mapping request to master, asking it to reparse the mapping and serialize them again. This mechanism is used to update the mapping after a format change caused by a version upgrade. The very same process can also be triggered when an old master leaves the cluster, triggering a local cluster state update. If that update contains old mapping format, the local node will again signal the need to refresh, but this time there is no master to accept the request. Instead of failing (which we now do because of elastic#10283, we should just skip the notification and wait for the next elected master to publish a new mapping (triggering another refresh if needed). Closes elastic#10311
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.
When the index service (which holds shards) fails to be created as a result of a shard being allocated on a node, we should fail the relevant shard, otherwise, it will remain stuck.
Same goes when there is a failure to process updated mappings form the master.
Note, both failures typically happen when the node is misconfigured (i.e. missing plugins, ...), since they get created and processed on the master node before being published.