Enhance copy_values processor to selectively copy entries from lists #4085
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Hai Yan <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Hai Yan <[email protected]>
oeyh
requested review from
chenqi0805,
engechas,
graytaylor0,
dinujoh,
kkondaka,
asifsmohammed and
dlvenable
as code owners
Signed-off-by: Hai Yan <[email protected]>
| if (!recordEvent.containsKey(entry.getToKey()) || entry.getOverwriteIfToKeyExists()) { | ||
| final Object source = recordEvent.get(entry.getFromKey(), Object.class); | ||
| recordEvent.put(entry.getToKey(), source); | ||
| if (!recordEvent.containsKey(entry.getToKey()) || entry.getOverwriteIfToKeyExists()) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggest refactor L77-85 into a private method shouldCopyEntry or skipCopyEntry
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good one. Made the change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also opened an issue for adding metrics: #4088
Signed-off-by: Hai Yan <[email protected]>
| } | ||
| try { | ||
| final Event recordEvent = record.getData(); | ||
| if (config.getFromList() != null || config.getToList() != null) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this check correct? What is the expected behavior if getFromList() returns null but getToList() is not null?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have a validation in CopyValueProcessorConfig that checks from_list and to_list should be both null or both non-null. So I assume this situation that getFromList() returns null but getToList() is not null won't happen.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Regarding documentation, since we are adopting the new process to use the documentation website and remove readme (see #2740). I have this issue created to update over there: opensearch-project/documentation-website#6390
Description
The configurations are like this:
Example input:
{ "mylist": [ {"name": "apple", "color": "red"}, {"name": "orange", "color": "orange"} ] }Example output:
{ "newlist": [ {"fruit_name": "apple"}, {"fruit_name": "orange"} ] }Issues Resolved
Resolves #3962
Check List
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.