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

Add support for append only indices #17039

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

RS146BIJAY
Copy link
Contributor

@RS146BIJAY RS146BIJAY commented Jan 16, 2025

Description

Adding support for Append only indices where we are disabling any form of updates and deletes on the index. We are also preventing passing a custom doc id for bulk indexing requests. Append only indices will be supported through a configurable setting. If this setting is enabled, all update and delete operations on the index (UPDATE, DELETE, UPSERT, UPDATE BY QUERY, DELETE BY QUERY, etc,) will be blocked.

Related Issues

#12886

Check List

  • Functionality includes testing.
  • API changes companion pull request created, if applicable.
  • Public documentation issue/PR created, if applicable.

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.

Copy link
Contributor

❌ Gradle check result for 38061f7: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

@RS146BIJAY RS146BIJAY marked this pull request as ready for review January 17, 2025 10:31
@RS146BIJAY RS146BIJAY changed the title Adding support for append only indices Add support for append only indices Jan 17, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

❌ Gradle check result for 7af2713: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

Copy link
Member

@mgodwan mgodwan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If indexing into lucene ever causes the version to be greater than 1, should we fail the shard?

@RS146BIJAY RS146BIJAY requested a review from cwperks as a code owner January 22, 2025 10:28
Copy link
Contributor

❌ Gradle check result for 694c524: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

Copy link
Contributor

❌ Gradle check result for 140d2b7: FAILURE

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

} else {
location = null;
}
} else if (indexResult.getSeqNo() != SequenceNumbers.UNASSIGNED_SEQ_NO
Copy link
Contributor

@bharath-techie bharath-techie Jan 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This also expects indexResult.getFailure() to be not null apart from not instance check of the new exception.
Should we change it to following (as used in line 962) to be safe ?

!(indexResult.getFailure() != null && (indexResult.getFailure() instanceof IndexingRetryException))

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants