Failed to close point-in-time id pitId – How to solve this Elasticsearch error

Opster Team

Aug-23, Version: 8.3-8.9

Before you dig into reading this guide, have you tried asking OpsGPT what this log means? You’ll receive a customized analysis of your log.

Try OpsGPT now for step-by-step guidance and tailored insights into your Elasticsearch operation.

Briefly, this error occurs when Elasticsearch fails to close a Point-In-Time (PIT) ID, which is used for consistent search results during long-running searches. This could be due to a network issue, a node failure, or the PIT ID no longer existing. To resolve this, you can try to manually close the PIT ID, ensure the network is stable, or check the health of your nodes. If the PIT ID no longer exists, you may need to create a new one. Always ensure to close PIT IDs after use to prevent unnecessary resource consumption.

For a complete solution to your to your search operation, try for free AutoOps for Elasticsearch & OpenSearch . With AutoOps and Opster’s proactive support, you don’t have to worry about your search operation – we take charge of it. Get improved performance & stability with less hardware.

This guide will help you check for common problems that cause the log ” failed to close point-in-time id [” + pitId + “] ” to appear. To understand the issues related to this log, read the explanation below about the following Elasticsearch concepts: plugin, cache.

Log Context

Log “failed to close point-in-time id [” + pitId + “]” classname is
We extracted the following from Elasticsearch source code for those seeking an in-depth context :


                        public void onFailure(Exception e) {
                            logger.warn(() -> "failed to close point-in-time id [" + pitId + "]"; e);
                    }; () -> Releasables.close(releasable)));
                    waitForRelease = true;
            } finally {


How helpful was this guide?

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?