-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.6k
Avoid warnings for non-system indexes using fast_refresh
#124294
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
Conversation
|
Pinging @elastic/es-storage-engine (Team:StorageEngine) |
| .put(IndexMetadata.SETTING_NUMBER_OF_REPLICAS, shardReplicas) | ||
| .put(IndexMetadata.SETTING_INDEX_UUID, UUIDs.randomBase64UUID()); | ||
| .put(IndexMetadata.SETTING_INDEX_UUID, UUIDs.randomBase64UUID()) | ||
| .put(IndexSettings.INDEX_FAST_REFRESH_SETTING.getKey(), false); // Avoid warnings for non-system indexes. |
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.
Is there a relative easy way to test the problem reported in the issue?
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.
It's a warning.. I tried to reproduce but it probably needs more than just the setting. @ywangd too for ideas.
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.
The warning is for serverless deployments since fast_refresh was a feature for serverless only. In a serverless deployment, you can trigger this warning by just creating a related system index, e.g.
PUT .security-profile-8
In theory, the alternative fix can be removing the fast_refresh setting from all system indices since the setting is a noop today. But I am not sure whether that could still have other implications. Overall fixing it here feels safer.
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 stand corrected, it's not just a warning - the provider doesn't work correctly when this trips. Not a real issue as system indexes are not in logsdb mode, but still easy to test.
martijnvg
left a comment
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.
LGTM, thanks Kostas!
ywangd
left a comment
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.
LGTM2
…24294) * Update LogsdbIndexModeSettingsProvider.java * add test
…24294) * Update LogsdbIndexModeSettingsProvider.java * add test
…24294) * Update LogsdbIndexModeSettingsProvider.java * add test
…24294) * Update LogsdbIndexModeSettingsProvider.java * add test
…24294) * Update LogsdbIndexModeSettingsProvider.java * add test
LogsdbIndexModeSettingsProvidercreates a transientMappingServiceto check the index mappings for information relevant tologsdbmode. This may trigger unrelated warnings, e.g. for non-system indexes configured with[fast_refresh=true]. To avoid the noise, we can always unset this setting as it's not relevant to thelogsdbfunctionality.Fixes #124284