Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

HPCC-29992 SOAPCALL check timelimit exceeded after call to getaddrinfo #17631

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 9, 2023
Merged

HPCC-29992 SOAPCALL check timelimit exceeded after call to getaddrinfo #17631

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 9, 2023

Conversation

mckellyln
Copy link
Contributor

Type of change:

  • This change is a bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
  • This change is a new feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
  • This change improves the code (refactor or other change that does not change the functionality)
  • This change fixes warnings (the fix does not alter the functionality or the generated code)
  • This change is a breaking change (fix or feature that will cause existing behavior to change).
  • This change alters the query API (existing queries will have to be recompiled)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
    • My code does not create any new warnings from compiler, build system, or lint.
  • The commit message is properly formatted and free of typos.
    • The commit message title makes sense in a changelog, by itself.
    • The commit is signed.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
    • I have updated the documentation accordingly, or...
    • I have created a JIRA ticket to update the documentation.
    • Any new interfaces or exported functions are appropriately commented.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTORS document.
  • The change has been fully tested:
    • I have added tests to cover my changes.
    • All new and existing tests passed.
    • I have checked that this change does not introduce memory leaks.
    • I have used Valgrind or similar tools to check for potential issues.
  • I have given due consideration to all of the following potential concerns:
    • Scalability
    • Performance
    • Security
    • Thread-safety
    • Cloud-compatibility
    • Premature optimization
    • Existing deployed queries will not be broken
    • This change fixes the problem, not just the symptom
    • The target branch of this pull request is appropriate for such a change.
  • There are no similar instances of the same problem that should be addressed
    • I have addressed them here
    • I have raised JIRA issues to address them separately
  • This is a user interface / front-end modification
    • I have tested my changes in multiple modern browsers
    • The component(s) render as expected

Smoketest:

  • Send notifications about my Pull Request position in Smoketest queue.
  • Test my draft Pull Request.

Testing:

This together with https://track.hpccsystems.com/browse/HPCC-29991 (#17629) will ensure timelimit is checked after single call to getaddrinfo (from ep.set), before connect().

@github-actions
Copy link

https://track.hpccsystems.com/browse/HPCC-29992
Jira updated

jakesmith
jakesmith reviewed Aug 3, 2023
View reviewed changes
common/thorhelper/thorsoapcall.cpp
Url &connUrl = master->proxyUrlArray.empty() ? url : master->proxyUrlArray.item(0);
ep.set(connUrl.host.get(), connUrl.port);
checkTimeLimitExceeded(&remainingMS); // after ep.set which might make a potentially long getaddrinfo lookup ...
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is it not reasonable to check at the start of the loop (i.e. as it was) as well?
i.e. that may be after it is stuck connecting on a socket for a while and throws an exception, gets another non black listed socket. As it stands, master->timeLimitExceeded will not yet be set in those circumstances afaics, so the next check is the one at the start of the loop.

Also, the connect call is using master->timeoutMS, but probably should be using remainingMS ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mckellyln mckellyln Aug 3, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok, I can add a checkTimeLimitExceeded() at its orig location so its checked there and also after the getaddrinfo() from the ep.set().
The connect() using master->timeoutMS change to use remainingMS is debatable because previously it would have done a single connect with the timeout set to number of attempts * timeout - so to be the same but with a new connect each time we use the timeout for each.
Similarly, there is some discussion if we should checkTimeLimitExceeded() in the connect() retry loop so that multiple connect() attempts do not exceed a timeLimit if provided. Or should timeOut and timeLimit be completely separate ?
So I think this is a good suggestion and perhaps worth of its own JIRA to discuss, but think it should remain as it is here.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree with both, keep original checkTimeLimitExceeded(&remainingMS); as well as this new line.

And open a new JIRA to investigate applying time limit to connect (in addition to timeout).

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mckellyln mckellyln Aug 4, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've added back a checkTimeLimitExceeded() at its original location in commit 2.
@jakesmith @afishbeck if ok with this I will squash.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks good.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

agreed, can you link the new JIRA to this JIRA? - to make it a little easier to find. Thanks.

jakesmith
jakesmith reviewed Aug 3, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@jakesmith jakesmith left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mckellyln - a couple of questions.

jakesmith
jakesmith approved these changes Aug 4, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@jakesmith jakesmith left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mckellyln looks good, please squash.

@mckellyln
Copy link
Contributor Author

squashed.
I have created JIRA https://track.hpccsystems.com/browse/HPCC-30038 and linked it to this one.

@mckellyln
Copy link
Contributor Author

ok to merge

@ghalliday ghalliday merged commit e1d668d into hpcc-systems:candidate-8.12.x Aug 9, 2023
48 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@afishbeck afishbeck afishbeck approved these changes

@jakesmith jakesmith jakesmith approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@mckellyln @jakesmith @afishbeck @ghalliday