-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.9k
Update bcpkix and bcprov dependencies #21543
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
Conversation
ghost
left a comment
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.
Unreported flaky test detected, please review
Unreported flaky test detectedIf the below flaky tests below are affected by the changes, please review and update the changes accordingly. Otherwise, a maintainer should report the flaky tests prior to merging the PR. org.keycloak.testsuite.ui.account2.ApplicationsTest#toggleApplicationDetailsTestKeycloak CI - Account Console IT (firefox) |
| <app.server.2.jboss.jvm.debug.args>-agentlib:jdwp=transport=dt_socket,server=y,suspend=${app.server.2.debug.suspend},address=localhost:${app.server.2.debug.port}</app.server.2.jboss.jvm.debug.args> | ||
| <app.server.memory.Xms>64m</app.server.memory.Xms> | ||
| <app.server.memory.Xmx>512m</app.server.memory.Xmx> | ||
| <app.server.memory.Xmx>768m</app.server.memory.Xmx> |
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.
Not sure if this change is safe. Seems like newer versions of BC are more memory demanding (see a failing test without this change). Is that something we want to risk as it might be directly affecting users.
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.
That's good point. Hopefully it affects just the app-server (which may not be that important AFAIK due the adapter tests executed on embedded undertow by default?).
Isn't it possible that app-server has both jdk15on and jdk18on dependencies and that being the cause of those issues?
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.
We run with app-server-wildfly by default.
I did a little bit more digging into this. I realized we're actually not including any BC dependencies with the WF/EAP adapter. We use the default BC module that's already present in WF. You can simply double check that by building the adapters dist and checking the JARs included. There are actually no 3rd party deps bundled in our adapters dist. That means WF/EAP adapter should not be affected by this change at all.
The reason for the out of memory test failures is that we're including the BC deps in our test app WARs. The newer versions of BC libs are a few MBs larger. Hence I believe we're reaching the memory limit because of this.
However, where we are also including the BC deps is the Tomcat and Jetty adapters. Those are affected by this upgrade. This is NOT tested in GHA. @mposolda @miquelsi Do we need to run the full internal pipeline to test this?
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.
Running internal adapter pipeline can be nice, however our java adapters are deprecated. So not 100% sure it is strictly needed if it is too much work... IMO any performance/memory "regression" specific only to java adapters is fine due their deprecation (as long as it does not affect the Keycloak server).
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.
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.
Yes, ok. I am approving
mposolda
left a comment
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.
In general, it looks as a good change, but might worth to investigate the memory consumption issue as pointed in the inline comments.
| <app.server.2.jboss.jvm.debug.args>-agentlib:jdwp=transport=dt_socket,server=y,suspend=${app.server.2.debug.suspend},address=localhost:${app.server.2.debug.port}</app.server.2.jboss.jvm.debug.args> | ||
| <app.server.memory.Xms>64m</app.server.memory.Xms> | ||
| <app.server.memory.Xmx>512m</app.server.memory.Xmx> | ||
| <app.server.memory.Xmx>768m</app.server.memory.Xmx> |
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.
That's good point. Hopefully it affects just the app-server (which may not be that important AFAIK due the adapter tests executed on embedded undertow by default?).
Isn't it possible that app-server has both jdk15on and jdk18on dependencies and that being the cause of those issues?
ghost
left a comment
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.
Unreported flaky test detected, please review
Unreported flaky test detectedIf the below flaky tests below are affected by the changes, please review and update the changes accordingly. Otherwise, a maintainer should report the flaky tests prior to merging the PR. org.keycloak.testsuite.webauthn.account.WebAuthnTransportLocaleTest#localizationTransportNFCKeycloak CI - WebAuthn IT (chrome) |
ASzc
left a comment
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.
It seems like this will do what you want it to do. There are a limited number of productized versions available for bcprov-jdk18on, so weigh that potential impact before merging.
@ASzc Thanks for the review. Is |
|
@vmuzikar The closest version I see is |
|
@ASzc We're shipping the JARs. |
|
@vmuzikar I have sent an inquiry about these GAVs |
Closes keycloak#21360 (cherry picked from commit 776bcbc)
|
@vmuzikar RHBQ has decided to productize these BC GAVs, so we're good |
|
@ASzc Thanks! |
Closes #21360 (important to see for more context and discussion)
Supersedes #21369