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 a deprecation notice to shadow replicas #22025

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 16, 2017

Conversation

bleskes
Copy link
Contributor

@bleskes bleskes commented Dec 7, 2016

See #22024

Copy link
Member

@jasontedor jasontedor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Take it to 5.0 too?

@bleskes
Copy link
Contributor Author

bleskes commented Dec 7, 2016

Take it to 5.0 too?

I felt we can't mark deprecated in hind sight... on the other hand it does make it for people. Doubting. Do others have opinions?

@javanna
Copy link
Member

javanna commented Dec 7, 2016

don't we usually include in the deprecation note the first version that had the feature deprecated? I think it can't be 5.0.0 although it would be technically possible as there are no code changes involved.

@jasontedor
Copy link
Member

I felt we can't mark deprecated in hind sight... on the other hand it does make it for people.

There is a word missing here so I'm not sure what you're saying (sorry), but my thinking is that people might land on the 5.0 docs from a search engine or elsewhere and not necessarily think to click to 5.1 or current. I'd hate for someone impacted by this to miss the notice.

@bleskes
Copy link
Contributor Author

bleskes commented Dec 7, 2016

you're saying (sorry)

It's me who should be saying sorry (the missing word is visible). I was torn between your point of view (let as many people as possible know) and the one of Luca.

@clintongormley it looks like you removed some labels - do you have an opinion here?

@javanna
Copy link
Member

javanna commented Dec 7, 2016

Maybe we should also log deprecation warnings when the feature is used? (not sure how feasible that is, and should not flood the logs, but at least we would make sure that people notice without having to look at the docs)

@clintongormley
Copy link

@bleskes re labels, just preparing the 5.1.1. release notes

I'm OK with deprecating it now (as in whichever version it lands in) but let's make sure there is deprecation logging

@bleskes
Copy link
Contributor Author

bleskes commented Jan 16, 2017

@clintongormley I added deprecation logging and updated the messages a bit. It now looks like this (when you create a shadow replicas index):

image

@jasontedor can you take another look?

Copy link
Member

@jasontedor jasontedor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

@bleskes bleskes merged commit 0da1902 into elastic:master Jan 16, 2017
@bleskes
Copy link
Contributor Author

bleskes commented Jan 16, 2017

Thx @jasontedor

@bleskes bleskes deleted the deprecate_shadow_replicas branch January 16, 2017 14:49
bleskes added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2017
…ly as it triggers (many) deprecation logging

#22025 deprecated this setting (pending it's removal) but it's frequent usage will spam the deprecation logs and also fails test. As temporary work around we should not use the setting object directly.
bleskes added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2017
@bleskes bleskes restored the deprecate_shadow_replicas branch January 16, 2017 15:20
@bleskes
Copy link
Contributor Author

bleskes commented Jan 16, 2017

I reverted this PR as it triggers warnings about usage of deprecated features. My bad for not catching it before merging

jasontedor added a commit to jasontedor/elasticsearch that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2017
* master: (131 commits)
  Replace EngineClosedException with AlreadyClosedExcpetion (elastic#22631)
  Remove HttpServer and HttpServerAdapter in favor of a simple dispatch method (elastic#22636)
  move ignore parameter support from yaml test client to low level rest client (elastic#22637)
  Fix thread safety of Stempel's token filter factory (elastic#22610)
  Update profile.asciidoc
  Wrap rest httpclient with doPrivileged blocks (elastic#22603)
  Revert "Add a deprecation notice to shadow replicas (elastic#22025)"
  Revert "Don'y use `INDEX_SHARED_FS_ALLOW_RECOVERY_ON_ANY_NODE_SETTING` directly as it triggers (many) deprecation logging"
  Don'y use `INDEX_SHARED_FS_ALLOW_RECOVERY_ON_ANY_NODE_SETTING` directly as it triggers (many) deprecation logging
  Add a deprecation notice to shadow replicas (elastic#22025)
  [Docs] Fix section title in profile.asciidoc
  ProfileResult and CollectorResult should print machine readable timing information (elastic#22561)
  Add replica ops with version conflict to translog
  Replace custom Functional interface in ElasticsearchException with CheckedFunction
  Make RestChannelConsumer extend CheckedConsumer<RestChannel, Exception>
  replace ShardSearchRequest.FilterParser functional interface with CheckedFunction
  replace custom functional interface with CheckedFunction in percolate module
  [TEST] replace SizeFunction with Function<Integer, Integer>
  Expose CheckedFunction
  Expose logs base path
  ...
@bleskes
Copy link
Contributor Author

bleskes commented Jan 16, 2017

This PR deprecates shadow replicas settings and the custom data path support. Upon discussion we have decided not to deprecate the custom data path settings. In order to avoid confusion I opened a new PR - #22647 - and remove the labels from this one.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants