Indexer error after upgrade to 2.3.11.3
Patrik Peng
patrik.peng at hostpoint.ch
Wed Oct 21 17:44:49 EEST 2020
On 16.10.20 18:34, Patrik Peng wrote:
> On 16.10.20 18:00, Scott Q. wrote:
>> This reminds me, the way I was able to reproduce this consistently
>> was by having large headers ( 100+ lines ).
>>
>>
>> On Friday, 16/10/2020 at 11:49 Patrik Peng wrote:
>>
>> On 19.08.20 17:37, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 17:03:57 +0200, Alessio Cecchi wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> after the upgrade to Dovecot 2.3.11.3, from 2.3.10.1, I see frequently
>>>> these errors from different users:
>>> It looks like this has been around for a while and you just got unlucky and
>>> started seeing this now. Here's a quick & dirty patch that should fix this.
>>> If you can try it, let us know how it went.
>>> Jeff.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/src/plugins/fts-solr/solr-connection.c b/src/plugins/fts-solr/solr-connection.c
>>> index ae720b5e2870a852c1b6c440939e3c7c0fa72b5c..9d364f93e2cd1b716b9ab61bd39656a6c5b1ea04 100644
>>> --- a/src/plugins/fts-solr/solr-connection.c
>>> +++ b/src/plugins/fts-solr/solr-connection.c
>>> @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ int solr_connection_init(const struct fts_solr_settings *solr_set,
>>> http_set.ssl = ssl_client_set;
>>> http_set.debug = solr_set->debug;
>>> http_set.rawlog_dir = solr_set->rawlog_dir;
>>> - solr_http_client = http_client_init(&http_set);
>>> + solr_http_client = http_client_init_private(&http_set);
>>> }
>>> *conn_r = conn;
>>> diff --git a/src/plugins/fts/fts-parser-tika.c b/src/plugins/fts/fts-parser-tika.c
>>> index a4b8b5c3034f57e22e77caa759c090da6b62f8ba..b8b57a350b9a710d101ac7ccbcc14560d415d905 100644
>>> --- a/src/plugins/fts/fts-parser-tika.c
>>> +++ b/src/plugins/fts/fts-parser-tika.c
>>> @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ tika_get_http_client_url(struct mail_user *user, struct http_url **http_url_r)
>>> http_set.request_timeout_msecs = 60*1000;
>>> http_set.ssl = &ssl_set;
>>> http_set.debug = user->mail_debug;
>>> - tika_http_client = http_client_init(&http_set);
>>> + tika_http_client = http_client_init_private(&http_set);
>>> }
>>> *http_url_r = tuser->http_url;
>>> return 0;
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> I'm also experiencing these issues while running Dovecot 2.3.11.3
>> with Solr 8.6.3 on FreeBSD 11.4. As mentioned in a previous mail,
>> the above patch is already applied to Dovecot's FreeBSD Port,
>> confirmed by the patches being present in the portstree
>> (https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/branches/2020Q3/mail/dovecot/files/).
>>
>> In a FreeBSD VM with the official image
>> (https://download.freebsd.org/ftp/releases/VM-IMAGES/12.1-RELEASE/amd64/Latest/)
>> I compiled dovecot from git and was able to reproduce the error
>> with the patch mentioned above applied and also without any
>> patches at all. From these results i conclude, that neither the
>> patches applied in FreeBSDs portstree or the patch above have any
>> influence.
>>
>> I also managed to reproduce the same results on a Debian 10
>> machine (also with and without the patch):
>>
>> doveadm(some.user at example.com): Panic: file http-client-request.c: line 1232 (http_client_request_send_more): assertion failed: (req->payload_input != NULL)
>> doveadm(some.user at example.com): Error: Raw backtrace: /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(backtrace_append+0x42) [0x7f093f7fc3c2]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(backtrace_get+0x1e) [0x7f093f7fc4ce] -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(+0xea341) [0x7f093f807341]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(+0xea381) [0x7f093f807381] -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(i_fatal+0) [0x7f093f75c074]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(http_client_request_send_more+0x378) [0x7f093f7a47a8]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(http_client_connection_output+0xe4) [0x7f093f7a90f4]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libssl_iostream_openssl.so <http://openssl.so>(+0x8bff) [0x7f093ec71bff]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(+0x1148b0) [0x7f093f8318b0]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(io_loop_call_io+0x69) [0x7f093f820259]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(io_loop_handler_run_internal+0x11b) [0x7f093f821b6b]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(io_loop_handler_run+0x59) [0x7f093f820369]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(io_loop_run+0x38) [0x7f093f820598]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(+0x86d1e) [0x7f093f7a3d1e]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so <http://libdovecot.so>.0(http_client_request_finish_payload+0x2e) [0x7f093f7a407e]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/lib21_fts_solr_plugin.so <http://plugin.so>(solr_connection_post_end+0x32) [0x7f093b8492c2]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/lib21_fts_solr_plugin.so <http://plugin.so>(+0x3a45) [0x7f093b844a45]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/lib20_fts_plugin.so <http://plugin.so>(+0x94cc) [0x7f093e1104cc]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/lib20_fts_plugin.so <http://plugin.so>(fts_backend_update_deinit+0x23) [0x7f093e110503]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/lib20_fts_plugin.so <http://plugin.so>(+0x10a9b) [0x7f093e117a9b]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/lib20_fts_plugin.so <http://plugin.so>(+0x119ca) [0x7f093e1189ca]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot-storage.so <http://libdovecot-storage.so>.0(mailbox_transaction_commit_get_changes+0x56) [0x7f093fb16076]
>> -> /usr/local/lib/dovecot/libdovecot-storage.so <http://libdovecot-storage.so>.0(mailbox_transaction_commit+0x1e) [0x7f093fb1615e]
>> -> doveadm(+0x31370) [0x5607cfa1f370] -> doveadm(+0x2b2a8) [0x5607cfa192a8]
>> -> doveadm(+0x2bfb2) [0x5607cfa19fb2] -> doveadm(doveadm_cmd_ver2_to_mail_cmd_wrapper+0x215) [0x5607cfa1ae05]
>> -> doveadm(doveadm_cmd_run_ver2+0x57c) [0x5607cfa2bbec] -> doveadm(doveadm_cmd_try_run_ver2+0x37) [0x5607cfa2bc37]
>> -> doveadm(main+0x1d2) [0x5607cfa09492]
>> Aborted
>>
>> During my tests I also did notice, that the error appears more
>> often depending of mail size and amount of mails in a folder:
>>
>> Tested with: doveadm -v fts rescan -usome.user at example.com && doveadm -v index -usome.user at example.com '*'
>> 1 Mail in INBOX with 9KB -> Error appeared 0 out of 20 times
>> 1 Mail in INBOX with 136KB -> Error appeared 17 out of 20 times
>> 3 Mails in INBOX with 408KB -> Error appeared 12 out of 20 times
>> 20 Mails in INBOX with ~2MB -> Error appeared 0 out of 20 times
>>
>> Maybe this info helps anyone.
>>
>> Patrik
>>
> Yeah, I read your mail and that's why I tested with different mail sizes.
> I did some more tests, one with large headers (around 700 lines of a
> long header line) but small body:
>
> 1 Mail in INBOX with 583KB -> Error appeared 5 out of 20 times
>
> and another with a large mail body but normal headers:
>
> 1 Mail in INBOX with 585KB -> Error appeared 0 out of 20 times
> I guess this kinda confirms your guess, but interestingly shows less
> errors than my previous test with a large header 136KB Mail.
>
>
> Patrik
>
I did notice that changing the batch_size in
fts_solr = url=http://solr.example.org:8983/solr/ soft_commit=yes batch_size=1000
does have an influence in how often the error occurs. Setting it to 1 or
some huge number like 10000 reduces the chances quite a bit but not
completely and also causes lots of small , or few but quite large
requests to Solr, so its not a practical workaround.
Whats the current state of this bug? A fix for it would be very welcome,
as it causes some trouble in our setup.
Regards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20201021/e952cee3/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the dovecot
mailing list