[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9981?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17353956#comment-17353956
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-9981:
-------------------------------------
There's no reason to rush fixes/backports for these improvements (it can make
things worse). I'm -1 against backporting to 8.x
*AGAIN*: I realize you think this is some kind of security issue, but it isn't
here. its just slow queries.
So rush your fixes into projects (solr, elasticsearch) that fuck up here, and
expose potentially slow queries like this over the network:
* require authentication
* don't allow slow queries (e.g. use a user-facing parser such as
simplequeryparser)
If you are just exposing entire elasticsearch "query DSL" to users without
authentication, the problem is 100% on you, you should get your head examined.
> CompiledAutomaton.getCommonSuffix can be extraordinarily slow, even with
> default maxDeterminizedStates limit
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-9981
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9981
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: LUCENE-9981.patch, LUCENE-9981.patch, LUCENE-9981.patch,
> LUCENE-9981_nfaprefix.patch, LUCENE-9981_test.patch,
> three-repeats-reverse-det.png, three-repeats.png
>
>
> We have a {{maxDeterminizedStates = 10000}} limit designed to keep
> regexp-type queries from blowing up.
> But we have an adversary that will run for 268s on my laptop before hitting
> exception, first reported here:
> https://github.com/opensearch-project/OpenSearch/issues/687
> When I run the test and jstack the threads, this what I see:
> {noformat}
> "TEST-TestOpensearch687.testInteresting-seed#[4B9C20A027A9850C]" #15 prio=5
> os_prio=0 cpu=56960.04ms elapsed=57.49s tid=0x00007fff7006ca80 nid=0x231c8
> runnable [0x00007fff8b7f0000]
> java.lang.Thread.State: RUNNABLE
> at
> org.apache.lucene.util.automaton.SortedIntSet.decr(SortedIntSet.java:106)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.util.automaton.Operations.determinize(Operations.java:769)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.util.automaton.Operations.getCommonSuffixBytesRef(Operations.java:1155)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.util.automaton.CompiledAutomaton.<init>(CompiledAutomaton.java:247)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.search.AutomatonQuery.<init>(AutomatonQuery.java:104)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.search.AutomatonQuery.<init>(AutomatonQuery.java:82)
> at org.apache.lucene.search.RegexpQuery.<init>(RegexpQuery.java:138)
> at org.apache.lucene.search.RegexpQuery.<init>(RegexpQuery.java:114)
> at org.apache.lucene.search.RegexpQuery.<init>(RegexpQuery.java:72)
> at org.apache.lucene.search.RegexpQuery.<init>(RegexpQuery.java:62)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.TestOpensearch687.testInteresting(TestOpensearch687.java:42)
> {noformat}
> This is really sad, as {{getCommonSuffixBytesRef()}} is only supposed to be
> an "up-front" optimization to make the actual subsequent terms-intensive part
> of the query faster. But it makes the whole query run for nearly 5 minutes
> before it does anything.
> So I definitely think we should improve {{getCommonSuffixBytesRef}} to be
> more "best-effort". For example, it can reduce the lower bound to {{1000}}
> and catch the exception like such:
> {code}
> try {
> // this is slow, and just an opto anyway, so don't burn cycles on it for
> some crazy worst-case.
> // if we don't set this common suffix, the query will just run a bit
> slower, that's all.
> int limit = Math.min(1000, maxDeterminizedStates);
> BytesRef suffix = Operations.getCommonSuffixBytesRef(binary, limit);
> ... (setting commonSuffixRef)
> } catch (TooComplexTooDeterminizeException notWorthIt) {
> commonSuffixRef = null;
> }
> {code}
> Another, maybe simpler option, is to just check that input state/transitions
> accounts don't exceed some low limit N.
> Basically this opto is geared at stuff like leading wildcard query of "*foo".
> By computing that the common suffix is "foo" we can spend less CPU in the
> terms dictionary because we can first do a memcmp before having to run data
> thru any finite state machine. It's really a microopt and we shouldn't be
> spending whole seconds of cpu on it, ever.
> But I still don't quite understand how the current limits are giving the
> behavior today, maybe there is a bigger issue and I don't want to shove
> something under the rug.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
