Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

E/RunLoop: Uncaught exception in Firebase runloop (3.0.0)

See original GitHub issue

Strange error! what is the issue behind this? Recently only, I’m seeing this error 😦

compile ‘com.google.firebase:firebase-database:9.0.2’ compile "‘om.google.firebase:firebase-auth:9.0.2’

E/RunLoop: Uncaught exception in Firebase runloop (3.0.0). Please report to support@firebase.com                                                
 java.lang.NullPointerException: Attempt to invoke virtual method 'void com.google.android.gms.internal.zzafg.zzg(com.google.android.gms.internal.zzafa, com.google.android.gms.internal.zzahu)' on a null object reference
                                                                   at com.google.android.gms.internal.zzafc.zzb(Unknown Source)
                                                                   at com.google.android.gms.internal.zzafc.zzat(Unknown Source)
                                                                   at com.google.firebase.database.connection.idl.IPersistentConnectionImpl$3.zzJ(Unknown Source)
                                                                   at com.google.firebase.database.connection.idl.zzi$zza.onTransact(Unknown Source)
                                                                   at android.os.Binder.transact(Binder.java:387)
                                                                   at alx.a(:com.google.android.gms.DynamiteModulesC:211)
                                                                   at amb.a(:com.google.android.gms.DynamiteModulesC:339)
                                                                   at akf.a(:com.google.android.gms.DynamiteModulesC:6851)
                                                                   at ajt.a(:com.google.android.gms.DynamiteModulesC:5191)
                                                                   at akw.b(:com.google.android.gms.DynamiteModulesC:226)
                                                                   at akw.a(:com.google.android.gms.DynamiteModulesC:271)
                                                                   at ald.run(:com.google.android.gms.DynamiteModulesC:1020)
                                                                   at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:423)
                                                                   at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:237)
                                                                   at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:269)
                                                                   at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1113)
                                                                   at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:588)
                                                                   at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:818)

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 7 years ago
Comments:29 (5 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

2reactions

rafaelperatellocommented, Sep 7, 2016

The same problem is happening with equalTo() method. Is there any usage of startAt/endAt inside equalTo?

2reactions

curiousilycommented, Aug 2, 2016

@samtstern - I have tried the new SDK 9.4.0 and the issue still persist. It arose when we used startAt() and endAt() for the first time. Our app is not multiprocess one (checked via the methods provided on StackOverflow) and we do not use the crash SDK.

There seems to be no progress on the mailing list, StackOverflow or this issue for a long time. Has it been tracked somewhere at Google? Have you got a chance to reproduce it? And why the issue is closed?