Handle legacy mappings with placeholder fields #85059
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
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
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
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
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -1191,7 +1191,7 @@ public Builder init(FieldMapper initializer) { | |
| return this; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| protected void merge(FieldMapper in, Conflicts conflicts) { | ||
| for (Parameter<?> param : getParameters()) { | ||
| param.merge(in, conflicts); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
@@ -1238,7 +1238,7 @@ protected void addScriptValidation( | |
| * Writes the current builder parameter values as XContent | ||
| */ | ||
| @Override | ||
| public XContentBuilder toXContent(XContentBuilder builder, Params params) throws IOException { | ||
| boolean includeDefaults = params.paramAsBoolean("include_defaults", false); | ||
| for (Parameter<?> parameter : getParameters()) { | ||
| parameter.toXContent(builder, includeDefaults); | ||
|
|
@@ -1304,6 +1304,12 @@ public final void parse(String name, MappingParserContext parserContext, Map<Str | |
| parameter = paramsMap.get(propName); | ||
| } | ||
| if (parameter == null) { | ||
| if (parserContext.indexVersionCreated().isLegacyIndexVersion()) { | ||
| // ignore unknown parameters on legacy indices | ||
| handleUnknownParamOnLegacyIndex(propName, propNode); | ||
| iterator.remove(); | ||
| continue; | ||
| } | ||
| if (isDeprecatedParameter(propName, parserContext.indexVersionCreated())) { | ||
| deprecationLogger.warn( | ||
| DeprecationCategory.API, | ||
|
|
@@ -1352,6 +1358,10 @@ public final void parse(String name, MappingParserContext parserContext, Map<Str | |
| validate(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| protected void handleUnknownParamOnLegacyIndex(String propName, Object propNode) { | ||
| // ignore | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| protected static ContentPath parentPath(String name) { | ||
| int endPos = name.lastIndexOf("."); | ||
| if (endPos == -1) { | ||
|
|
@@ -1388,21 +1398,39 @@ public static final class TypeParser implements Mapper.TypeParser { | |
|
|
||
| private final BiFunction<String, MappingParserContext, Builder> builderFunction; | ||
| private final BiConsumer<String, MappingParserContext> contextValidator; | ||
| private final Version minimumCompatibilityVersion; // see Mapper.TypeParser#supportsVersion() | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Creates a new TypeParser | ||
| * @param builderFunction a function that produces a Builder from a name and parsercontext | ||
| */ | ||
| public TypeParser(BiFunction<String, MappingParserContext, Builder> builderFunction) { | ||
| this(builderFunction, (n, c) -> {}, Version.CURRENT.minimumIndexCompatibilityVersion()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /** | ||
| * Variant of {@link #TypeParser(BiFunction)} that allows to defining a minimumCompatibilityVersion to | ||
| * allow parsing mapping definitions of legacy indices (see {@link Mapper.TypeParser#supportsVersion(Version)}). | ||
| */ | ||
| public TypeParser(BiFunction<String, MappingParserContext, Builder> builderFunction, Version minimumCompatibilityVersion) { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. would it help to add javadocs here to clarify when to use which constructor? as far as I understand, the constructor that takes the version is the one called by all the mappers that are supported on legacy indices, all the rest remains the same? There was a problem hiding this comment. addressed in f163412 |
||
| this(builderFunction, (n, c) -> {}, minimumCompatibilityVersion); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public TypeParser( | ||
| BiFunction<String, MappingParserContext, Builder> builderFunction, | ||
| BiConsumer<String, MappingParserContext> contextValidator | ||
| ) { | ||
| this(builderFunction, contextValidator, Version.CURRENT.minimumIndexCompatibilityVersion()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private TypeParser( | ||
| BiFunction<String, MappingParserContext, Builder> builderFunction, | ||
| BiConsumer<String, MappingParserContext> contextValidator, | ||
| Version minimumCompatibilityVersion | ||
| ) { | ||
| this.builderFunction = builderFunction; | ||
| this.contextValidator = contextValidator; | ||
| this.minimumCompatibilityVersion = minimumCompatibilityVersion; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
|
|
@@ -1412,6 +1440,11 @@ public Builder parse(String name, Map<String, Object> node, MappingParserContext | |
| builder.parse(name, parserContext, node); | ||
| return builder; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public boolean supportsVersion(Version indexCreatedVersion) { | ||
| return indexCreatedVersion.onOrAfter(minimumCompatibilityVersion); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| } | ||
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
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
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
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.
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.
this I find a bit surprising especially given that field aliases were added with 6.4 . I wonder if this is never called, in which case maybe we should throw exception instead, or if it could rely on the default impl instead.
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.
Even though field aliases were only added in ES 6.4, they could be used with older indices as well (i.e. you had a 5.x index for example that you kept using in 6.4 and now added the field alias to the mapping of that 5.x index). As field aliases are more of a runtime property (e.g. just like runtime fields, which you could also use on indices created before the release of runtime fields) and have no connection to the actual data, I see no reason to limit their use.