Configurable storageProviderTimeout #11989

dasniko · 2022-05-14T07:27:02Z

dasniko
May 14, 2022

this topic is not directly about the NEW store, but a store issue...

I just stumbled upon an old, not resolved, issue here: KEYCLOAK-18856
The not-so-configurable storageProviderTimeout.

A customer of mine has just this requirement to increase the current "fixed" 3000ms timeout.
Is there any way to achieve it?

For now, I only have a (very dirty) reflection approach:

Configuring a custom storageProviderTimeout property value for the custom SPI.
Then, use this code in the CustomStorageProviderFactory:

private Long storageProviderTimeout = 3000L;

@Override
public void init(Config.Scope config) {
    storageProviderTimeout = config.getLong("storageProviderTimeout", storageProviderTimeout);
}

@Override
public void postInit(KeycloakSessionFactory factory) {
    KeycloakSession session = factory.create();
    UserProvider userProvider = session.userStorageManager();
    try {
        Field field = userProvider.getClass().getSuperclass().getDeclaredField("STORAGE_PROVIDER_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT");
        field.setAccessible(true);
        Field modifiers = field.getClass().getDeclaredField("modifiers");
        modifiers.setAccessible(true);
        modifiers.setInt(field, field.getModifiers() & ~Modifier.FINAL);
        field.set(userProvider, storageProviderTimeout);
    } catch (NoSuchFieldException | IllegalAccessException e) {
        throw new RuntimeException(e);
    }
}

(seen here)
But I don't feel very comfortable with it. ;)

is there any change to get a fix in one of the next versions? Or will it only be fixed with the new store and new provider management, and thus it will still take some time?

Thanks & regards,
- Niko

hmlnarik · 2022-06-09T08:02:37Z

hmlnarik
Jun 9, 2022

@dasniko Thank you for the report.
@mhajas Could you please chime in?

0 replies

mhajas · 2022-06-09T14:25:40Z

mhajas
Jun 9, 2022

Hello @dasniko, if I understand correctly (please correct me if I am wrong), the only issue is that we are not able to set the value for storageProviderTimeout in standalone.xml because the schema doesn't allow it. This is present only in Wildfly distribution using the legacy store. Since it is the legacy store and legacy distribution, I don't think we have any plans to address this in the next release. On the other hand, the fix should be pretty straightforward; just allowing the property to be set in the correct place so that AbstractStorageManager can pick it up. Am I missing something?

0 replies

thomasdarimont · 2022-06-13T23:29:56Z

thomasdarimont
Jun 13, 2022
Collaborator

The following setting works for me with Keycloak 18.0.0 on Quarkus --spi-user-storage-provider-timeout=2000

5 replies

nkuruza Oct 11, 2022

How can I add the same setting for the Wildfly distribution?

mhajas Oct 13, 2022

@nkuruza I am afraid it is not possible to set with the Wildfly distribution.

nkuruza Oct 13, 2022

Thank you very much for the response, @mhajas. I guess I will have try the dirty reflection approach provided above.

Thanks again.

mhajas Oct 14, 2022

Consider switching to Quarkus distribution. New releases won't contain Wildfly dist anymore.

mhagnumdw Feb 14, 2023

The following setting works for me with Keycloak 18.0.0 on Quarkus --spi-user-storage-provider-timeout=2000

Hi! Does the --spi-user-storage-provider-timeout parameter exist in the documentation? Where?!

dasniko · 2022-06-14T15:17:39Z

dasniko
Jun 14, 2022
Author

Thanks @mhajas and @thomasdarimont for responding.
I wasn‘t aware of the fact, that it really is „only“ a schema issue in Wildfly. I formerly read the KEYCLOAK-18856 issue in the way that it was a wrong implementation in the AbstractUserManager, but it seems that it is working as expected in Quarkus, as @thomasdarimont already mentioned and I confirm this. Unfortunately I didn‘t had time to check this earlier.

The initial request, when creating this discussion threat, I had to solve it somehow for the legacy Wildfly distribution. But I don‘t think it has to be fixed for Wildfly. One reason more to convince the customer to migrate better sooner than later. :)

0 replies

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

Configurable storageProviderTimeout #11989

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Replies: 4 comments 5 replies

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

{{title}}

Uh oh!

Select a reply

Uh oh!

Configurable storageProviderTimeout #11989

Uh oh!

Replies: 4 comments · 5 replies

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

thomasdarimont Jun 13, 2022 Collaborator

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dasniko Jun 14, 2022 Author

Replies: 4 comments 5 replies

thomasdarimont
Jun 13, 2022
Collaborator

dasniko
Jun 14, 2022
Author