-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 130
Updating the Rollover page #2589
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
yetanothertw
wants to merge
9
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
rollover-improvements
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+73
−27
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3e82318
Updating the Rollover page
yetanothertw d6d05cc
More edits to add relevant links to other sections
yetanothertw 0708c30
Another round of edits to provide more context
yetanothertw 45c4266
Applying review recommendations
yetanothertw c082712
Fix wrong callout statement
yetanothertw e88268a
Fix callout formatting
yetanothertw b76c22c
Update table to emphasize setup differences
yetanothertw e26c54d
Add minor clarification
yetanothertw f69f6f9
Addressing peer review feedback
yetanothertw File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dakrone I think this and line 19 are based off of your comment. Do you think it's okay for us to introduce "DLM" here as an acronym for "data stream lifecycle management"? I'm a little hesitant since I gather DLM is already in popular use as "data lifecycle management" (e.g. IBM, HP), and our use here specifically to denote "data stream lifecycle" doesn't quite match. That is, to my mind "ILM" and "data stream lifecycle" are two different approaches to DLM.
What would you think of our sticking with:
If we do introduce an acronym for "data stream lifecycle" we should also update this main page about it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we can stick with ILM to refer to the data stream's lifecycle, since they are different (ILM has policies, is attached at the index level, has separate APIs, is not available in Serverless, etc).
The challenge that we've run into with "data stream lifecycle" is that absent an acronym, folks have been calling it "DSL", which is a MUCH more confusing acronym than "DLM", so we've been substituting DLM for the name to differentiate it from ILM, but still indicate it is the "Data (in the data stream) Lifecycle Management".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Roger that. Thanks for the clarification! DLM it is. :-)