Skip to content

Conversation

@original-brownbear
Copy link
Contributor

Backports the following commits to 9.0:

…1922)

This is a really strange assertion. I get that it tries to make sure we
skip unavailable without forking but this makes extending the
AbstractSearchAsyncAction cleanly for batched execution needlessly hard
and some of the assertion is dead code already because can-match isn't
going through this codepath anymore.

-> lets remove it, the code is simple enough now to follow that there's
no forking here IMO
@original-brownbear original-brownbear added :Search Foundations/Search Catch all for Search Foundations >non-issue auto-merge-without-approval Automatically merge pull request when CI checks pass (NB doesn't wait for reviews!) backport Team:Search Foundations Meta label for the Search Foundations team in Elasticsearch labels Feb 7, 2025
@javanna
Copy link
Member

javanna commented Feb 7, 2025

I don't think this should go to 9.0, why would it? The branch is feature frozen.

@elasticsearchmachine elasticsearchmachine merged commit 70b4cee into elastic:9.0 Feb 18, 2025
16 checks passed
@original-brownbear original-brownbear deleted the backport/9.0/pr-121922 branch February 18, 2025 09:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

auto-merge-without-approval Automatically merge pull request when CI checks pass (NB doesn't wait for reviews!) backport >non-issue :Search Foundations/Search Catch all for Search Foundations Team:Search Foundations Meta label for the Search Foundations team in Elasticsearch v9.0.1

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants