-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25k
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
Fix up trappy timeouts related to ingest pipelines #112907
Fix up trappy timeouts related to ingest pipelines #112907
Conversation
Pinging @elastic/es-data-management (Team:Data Management) |
// wait for as long as it takes to create the pipeline | ||
MasterNodeRequest.INFINITE_MASTER_NODE_TIMEOUT, | ||
// TODO should this be longer? | ||
AcknowledgedRequest.DEFAULT_ACK_TIMEOUT, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is the only questionable bit really, should these timeouts both be infinite? Or zero for the ack timeout?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is it bad to leave it as the default of 30 seconds? Do we need to decide between 0 or infinite?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, it can be whatever we want, if we decide they should remain at 30s then that's fine too. IMO 30s is fairly suspicious tho, it means that if this happens to be running in a cluster that's a little slow then this will fail with a timeout, and it's not a timeout that the user can influence. But I don't have any strong opinions here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure if we should change it then. I suppose I'm afraid that changing it to be infinite without a way to cancel the enrichment execution would be bad, and changing it to 0 so that there's zero tolerance for a cluster to have any delay would also be bad. I don't have a strong opinion though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok I've set it back to 30s, introducing a new enrich-specific constant to make it clearer that this is a positive decision.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks David
Relates #107984