Document that ?wait_for_active_shards=0 is permitted
#114091
Merged
Conversation
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
Today the docs for the `?wait_for_active_shards` parameter say that it must be a positive integer, proscribing `0`, yet `0` is a legitimate value for this parameter. This commit fixes this point and rewords the docs slightly for clarity.
DaveCTurner
added
>docs
|
Documentation preview: |
elasticsearchmachine
added
Team:Data Management
|
Pinging @elastic/es-docs (Team:Docs) |
|
Pinging @elastic/es-data-management (Team:Data Management) |
mark-vieira
added
auto-backport
DaveCTurner
added
auto-merge-without-approval
DaveCTurner
added a commit
to DaveCTurner/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
Today the docs for the `?wait_for_active_shards` parameter say that it must be a positive integer, proscribing `0`, yet `0` is a legitimate value for this parameter. This commit fixes this point and rewords the docs slightly for clarity.
DaveCTurner
added a commit
to DaveCTurner/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
Today the docs for the `?wait_for_active_shards` parameter say that it must be a positive integer, proscribing `0`, yet `0` is a legitimate value for this parameter. This commit fixes this point and rewords the docs slightly for clarity.
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
…4273) Today the docs for the `?wait_for_active_shards` parameter say that it must be a positive integer, proscribing `0`, yet `0` is a legitimate value for this parameter. This commit fixes this point and rewords the docs slightly for clarity.
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
…4274) Today the docs for the `?wait_for_active_shards` parameter say that it must be a positive integer, proscribing `0`, yet `0` is a legitimate value for this parameter. This commit fixes this point and rewords the docs slightly for clarity.
matthewabbott
pushed a commit
to matthewabbott/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 10, 2024
Today the docs for the `?wait_for_active_shards` parameter say that it must be a positive integer, proscribing `0`, yet `0` is a legitimate value for this parameter. This commit fixes this point and rewords the docs slightly for clarity.
davidkyle
pushed a commit
to davidkyle/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 13, 2024
Today the docs for the `?wait_for_active_shards` parameter say that it must be a positive integer, proscribing `0`, yet `0` is a legitimate value for this parameter. This commit fixes this point and rewords the docs slightly for clarity.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
Today the docs for the
?wait_for_active_shardsparameter say that itmust be a positive integer, proscribing
0, yet0is a legitimatevalue for this parameter. This commit fixes this point and rewords the
docs slightly for clarity.