You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
What is the bug?
While debugging latency contributors in an OpenSearch 2.13 cluster using JDK serialization, we noticed SafeSerializationUtils.isSafeClass adds ~20% overhead to latency although it isn't as visible in flamegraphs (0.02%) (This was validated by short circuiting isSafeClass to return).
What is the expected behavior?
It seems like a very low hanging fruit to gain significant performance benefit.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
krishna-ggk
added
bug
Something isn't working
untriaged
Require the attention of the repository maintainers and may need to be prioritized
labels
Sep 30, 2024
krishna-ggk
changed the title
[BUG/performance] Safe classes to serialize/deserialize adds performance overhead in high volume scenarios
[BUG/performance] Serialization/Deserialization check for safe classes adds performance overhead
Sep 30, 2024
cwperks
added
triaged
Issues labeled as 'Triaged' have been reviewed and are deemed actionable.
and removed
untriaged
Require the attention of the repository maintainers and may need to be prioritized
labels
Oct 7, 2024
[Triage] Thanks for the issue @krishna-ggk and associated flame graph. 20% overhead sounds quite high for a method that is just to lookup a classname in a list of allowed class names. This sounds like it would be a good performance benefit if it can be optimized securely. Marking this issue as triaged.
What is the bug?
While debugging latency contributors in an OpenSearch 2.13 cluster using JDK serialization, we noticed SafeSerializationUtils.isSafeClass adds ~20% overhead to latency although it isn't as visible in flamegraphs (0.02%) (This was validated by short circuiting isSafeClass to return).
What is the expected behavior?
It seems like a very low hanging fruit to gain significant performance benefit.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: