Convert Processor enhancement (description, snippet)
#35280
Conversation
Sometimes, the users are confused about they can use `Convert Processor` for changing existing field's type to other types even the existing one is already ingested. This confusion is from the first line of description. Also, code snippet has not complete syntax, so it is misleading the right usage.
cbuescher
added
>docs
|
Pinging @elastic/es-core-infra |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @insukcho, I left some questions. I agree that if you see confusion with some people around this documentation we should try to improve it, but I wonder if the proposed changes might not provoke more questions. I left some comments along those lines.
| "field" : "url.port", | ||
| "type": "integer" | ||
| } | ||
| "description": "for student index converting from string id field to integer one ", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Again, this raises the question where or what the student index is. I would keep it more general. What do you think is missing or ambigouous from the previous example?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree, how about describe pipeline for more general purpose?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe you could decribe what the processor does. In this case it "converts the content of the id field to an integer". By callind the field e.g. "id_string" you could also make it clearer that the original field is suppoesd to not be an integer but a string.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree w/ describe more clear description like converts the content of the id field to an integer. But for using "id_string" maybe not a good idea because it was string, but it will be changed to integer after ingestion. So, it can make more confusion.
|
@cbuescher Thanks for your comments. I make new commit which is following your suggestion except |
|
@insukcho latest CI failures are unrelated to your change, I will build the docs once again locally and merge if that is successful. |
Sometimes users are confused about whether they can use the Convert Processor for changing an existing fields type to other types even if the existing one is already ingested. This confusion is from the first line of description. Changing this and also adding a some detail to the code snippet.
Sometimes users are confused about whether they can use the Convert Processor for changing an existing fields type to other types even if the existing one is already ingested. This confusion is from the first line of description. Changing this and also adding a some detail to the code snippet.
* master: (24 commits) Replicate index settings to followers (elastic#35089) Rename RealmConfig.globalSettings() to settings() (elastic#35330) [TEST] Cleanup FileUserPasswdStoreTests (elastic#35329) Scripting: Add back lookup vars in score script (elastic#34833) watcher: Fix integration tests to ensure correct start/stop of Watcher (elastic#35271) Remove ALL shard check in CheckShrinkReadyStep (elastic#35346) Use soft-deleted docs to resolve strategy for engine operation (elastic#35230) [ILM] Check shard and relocation status in AllocationRoutedStep (elastic#35316) Ignore date ranges containing 'now' when pre-processing a percolator query (elastic#35160) Add a frozen engine implementation (elastic#34357) Put a fake allocation id on allocate stale primary command (elastic#34140) [CCR] Enforce auto follow pattern name restrictions (elastic#35197) [ILM] rolling upgrade tests (elastic#35328) [ML] Add Missing data checking class (elastic#35310) Apply `ignore_throttled` also to concrete indices (elastic#35335) Make version field names more meaningful (elastic#35334) [CCR] Added HLRC support for pause follow API (elastic#35216) [Docs] Improve Convert Processor description (elastic#35280) [Painless] Removes extraneous compile method (elastic#35323) [CCR] Fail with a better error if leader index is red (elastic#35298) ...
Sometimes users are confused about whether they can use the Convert Processor for changing an existing fields type to other types even if the existing one is already ingested. This confusion is from the first line of description. Changing this and also adding a some detail to the code snippet.
|
Thank you for your help, @cbuescher !! |
Sometimes, the users are confused about they can use
Convert Processorfor changing existing field's type to other types even the existing one is already ingested. This confusion is from the first line of description.Also, code snippet has not complete syntax, so it is misleading the right usage.