[Rest Compatible Api] include_type_name parameter #70966
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ | |
| import org.elasticsearch.action.support.IndicesOptions; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.action.support.master.AcknowledgedRequest; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.common.ParseField; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.common.RestApiVersion; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.common.io.stream.StreamInput; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.common.io.stream.StreamOutput; | ||
| import org.elasticsearch.common.unit.ByteSizeValue; | ||
|
|
@@ -37,7 +38,7 @@ | |
| */ | ||
| public class RolloverRequest extends AcknowledgedRequest<RolloverRequest> implements IndicesRequest { | ||
|
|
||
| private static final ObjectParser<RolloverRequest, Boolean> PARSER = new ObjectParser<>("rollover"); | ||
| private static final ObjectParser<Map<String, Condition<?>>, Void> CONDITION_PARSER = new ObjectParser<>("conditions"); | ||
|
|
||
| private static final ParseField CONDITIONS = new ParseField("conditions"); | ||
|
|
@@ -67,14 +68,32 @@ public class RolloverRequest extends AcknowledgedRequest<RolloverRequest> implem | |
| CONDITIONS, ObjectParser.ValueType.OBJECT); | ||
| PARSER.declareField((parser, request, context) -> request.createIndexRequest.settings(parser.map()), | ||
| CreateIndexRequest.SETTINGS, ObjectParser.ValueType.OBJECT); | ||
| PARSER.declareField((parser, request, includeTypeName) -> { | ||
| if (includeTypeName) { | ||
| //expecting one type only | ||
| for (Map.Entry<String, Object> mappingsEntry : parser.map().entrySet()) { | ||
| request.createIndexRequest.mapping((Map<String, Object>) mappingsEntry.getValue()); | ||
| } | ||
| } else { | ||
| // a type is not included, add a dummy _doc type | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Rather than doing a check here I think we should just wrap it with There was a problem hiding this comment. I basically tried to retrofit the change from 7.x branch. |
||
| Map<String, Object> mappings = parser.map(); | ||
| if (MapperService.isMappingSourceTyped(MapperService.SINGLE_MAPPING_NAME, mappings)) { | ||
| throw new IllegalArgumentException("The mapping definition cannot be nested under a type " + | ||
| "[" + MapperService.SINGLE_MAPPING_NAME + "] unless include_type_name is set to true."); | ||
| } | ||
| request.createIndexRequest.mapping(mappings); | ||
| } | ||
| }, CreateIndexRequest.MAPPINGS.forRestApiVersion(RestApiVersion.equalTo(RestApiVersion.V_7)), ObjectParser.ValueType.OBJECT); | ||
| PARSER.declareField((parser, request, context) -> { | ||
| // a type is not included, add a dummy _doc type | ||
| Map<String, Object> mappings = parser.map(); | ||
| if (MapperService.isMappingSourceTyped(MapperService.SINGLE_MAPPING_NAME, mappings)) { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. And I think we should remove this check as well - really to check properly we need to parse the mappings, and if they've included a type this will get caught further along. There was a problem hiding this comment. Building on what I said in a previous comment -- these were added in #38270 to catch an important case that mapping parsing wasn't able to detect. But there have been substantial improvements/ refactors to mapping parsing since then, so we may be able to remove these checks and have the tests still pass. To keep this PR a straightforward 'restore' of old logic, maybe we could look into removing these checks in a follow-up. There was a problem hiding this comment. Assuming I am reading the code correctly, this check is only applied when REST API compatibility for v7 is applied (i.e. CreateIndexRequest.MAPPINGS.forRestApiVersion(RestApiVersion.equalTo(RestApiVersion.V_7)), but the check is now no longer for v8+. I have a minor preference to keep the check when compatibility is in use, else remove the check in a follow up PR if it also requires changes to the test. There was a problem hiding this comment. I see, in that case I will keep the check for both 7.x and 8.x fields. There was a problem hiding this comment. ++ let's keep it for now and I can look at removing it in a followup |
||
|
|
||
| throw new IllegalArgumentException("The mapping definition cannot be nested under a type"); | ||
| } | ||
| request.createIndexRequest.mapping(mappings); | ||
| }, CreateIndexRequest.MAPPINGS.forRestApiVersion(RestApiVersion.onOrAfter(RestApiVersion.V_8)), ObjectParser.ValueType.OBJECT); | ||
|
|
||
| PARSER.declareField((parser, request, context) -> request.createIndexRequest.aliases(parser.map()), | ||
| CreateIndexRequest.ALIASES, ObjectParser.ValueType.OBJECT); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
@@ -238,7 +257,7 @@ public CreateIndexRequest getCreateIndexRequest() { | |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // param isTypeIncluded decides how mappings should be parsed from XContent | ||
| public void fromXContent(boolean isTypeIncluded, XContentParser parser) throws IOException { | ||
| PARSER.parse(parser, this, isTypeIncluded); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -37,6 +37,10 @@ | |
| import java.util.Objects; | ||
| import java.util.Set; | ||
|
|
||
| import static org.elasticsearch.common.RestApiVersion.V_8; | ||
| import static org.elasticsearch.common.RestApiVersion.onOrAfter; | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| public class IndexTemplateMetadata extends AbstractDiffable<IndexTemplateMetadata> { | ||
|
|
||
| private final String name; | ||
|
|
@@ -378,7 +382,9 @@ private static void toInnerXContent(IndexTemplateMetadata indexTemplateMetadata, | |
| indexTemplateMetadata.settings().toXContent(builder, params); | ||
| builder.endObject(); | ||
|
|
||
| if(builder.getRestApiVersion().matches(onOrAfter(V_8))) { | ||
| includeTypeName &= (params.paramAsBoolean("reduce_mappings", false) == false); | ||
| } | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. @romseygeek do you think there need to be a special handing for this in V7 mode? There was a problem hiding this comment. I think this |
||
|
|
||
| CompressedXContent m = indexTemplateMetadata.mappings(); | ||
| if (m != null) { | ||
|
|
||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.