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.

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

inclusionChecker: rare possibility of getting ahead of submissions #104

Open
ezekiel opened this issue Jul 17, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

inclusionChecker: rare possibility of getting ahead of submissions #104

ezekiel opened this issue Jul 17, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@ezekiel
Copy link
Member

ezekiel commented Jul 17, 2019

We have encountered the very rare occasion where the inclusionChecker is following very closely with the log/shard tree-head and happens to miss an included certificate. Re-starting ct-woodpecker with the LogIndex set back a couple tens of thousands allows ct-woodpecker to "see" the certificate it missed, and then continue on as normal.

I don't yet know how it could have missed the certificate it submitted, only that ct-woodpecker at the time was very up-to-date, following the shard's tree-head quite closely (ct-woodpecker itself may have been the only entity submitting to this shard).

@cpu
Copy link
Contributor

cpu commented Jul 17, 2019

Thanks for the bug report.

Can you share the log output from the time period before you changed the LogIndex and restarted ct-woodpecker?

@ezekiel
Copy link
Member Author

ezekiel commented Jul 17, 2019

Attaching a 2-hour timeframe for certSubmitter and inclusionChecker logs only. Looks like the overlooked cert was submitted 02:04:22.
ct-woodpecker.log

@cpu
Copy link
Contributor

cpu commented Jul 17, 2019

@ezekiel Thanks, that's perfect 👍

@cpu cpu added the bug Something isn't working label Jul 19, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants