No published hash for the consistent secure setting but it exists on the local node – How to solve this Elasticsearch error

Opster Team

Aug-23, Version: 7.3-7.15

Briefly, this error occurs when there is a mismatch between the secure settings of the Elasticsearch cluster nodes. This can happen if a node has a secure setting that is not present in the cluster state. To resolve this issue, you can either remove the secure setting from the node or add the same secure setting to all other nodes in the cluster. Another way is to reset the secure settings on the node and then restart it. Always ensure that all nodes in the cluster have the same secure settings to avoid this error.

This guide will help you check for common problems that cause the log ” no published hash for the consistent secure setting [{}] but it exists on the local node ” to appear. To understand the issues related to this log, read the explanation below about the following Elasticsearch concepts: node, settings.

Log Context

Log “no published hash for the consistent secure setting [{}] but it exists on the local node” classname is ConsistentSettingsService.java.
We extracted the following from Elasticsearch source code for those seeking an in-depth context :

                // consistency of missing
                logger.debug("no published hash for the consistent secure setting [{}] but it also does NOT exist on the local node";
                        concreteSecureSetting.getKey());
            } else if (publishedSaltAndHash == null && localHash != null) {
                // setting missing on master but present locally
                logger.warn("no published hash for the consistent secure setting [{}] but it exists on the local node";
                        concreteSecureSetting.getKey());
                if (state.nodes().isLocalNodeElectedMaster()) {
                    throw new IllegalStateException("Master node cannot validate consistent setting. No published hash for ["
                            + concreteSecureSetting.getKey() + "] but setting exists.");
                }

 

 [ratemypost]