Skip to content
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

Added config param skip_update_action_builder to control update_action_builder #463

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sxmichael
Copy link

@sxmichael sxmichael commented Aug 7, 2016

Switching off update_action_builder is necessary when the input is already in es_bulk format, to allow just passing the content through without the need to parse all the special cases at input (doc_as_upsert, script, params) and re-creating it.

@karmi
Copy link

karmi commented Aug 7, 2016

Hi @sxmichael, we have found your signature in our records, but it seems like you have signed with a different e-mail than the one used in yout Git commit. Can you please add both of these e-mails into your Github profile (they can be hidden), so we can match your e-mails to your Github profile?

@sxmichael sxmichael force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from b8252c6 to 6893adf Compare August 7, 2016 22:05
@untergeek
Copy link
Contributor

For this change, it is be important to add Rspec tests to validate the new argument, and that the output is as expected. Is this something you can do, @sxmichael, or do you need assistance?

@sxmichael
Copy link
Author

@untergeek just to clarify - do you mean to add rspec test to validate the cases when passed build_update_action=false? If yes, I can do it. Else, could you please clarify which tests do you mean?

@untergeek
Copy link
Contributor

@sxmichael That's exactly what I mean. Add tests for the changes you've made.

@sxmichael sxmichael force-pushed the master branch 8 times, most recently from 20d20cd to 20f83e9 Compare August 16, 2016 10:01
@sxmichael sxmichael changed the title Added config param build_update_action to control update_action_builder Added config param skip_update_action_builder to control update_action_builder Aug 16, 2016
Added config param skip_update_action_builder to allow disabling update_action_builder.
Switching off update_action_builder is necessary when the input is already in es_bulk format, to allow just passing the content through without the need to parse all the special cases at input (doc_as_upsert, script, params) and re-creating it.
@sxmichael
Copy link
Author

@untergeek I've added the test. PLease let me know if it's ok. Thanks

@sxmichael
Copy link
Author

@untergeek @karmi any update?

@andrewvc
Copy link
Contributor

I don't believe it is a goal for this output to support the native ES output bulk format as input. Why do you need this? Why not just talk directly to elasticsearch without logstash?

@sxmichael
Copy link
Author

Hi @andrewvc , sorry for the delay. The basic idea here is to be able to replace long time ago deprecated river funtionality. We have application writing it's data in bulk api format to rabbitmq and wanted to leverage logstash to ship the data to es. There are several benefits here, the most major ones are ability to withstand the data spikes, no need to implement retry logic on application side (in case of version conflicts or request throttling) and ability to build bigger bulks (application could output data in item by item or small chunks and give logstash build bigger bulk messages and send to es).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants