Mapping parameters #2084
Merged
Mapping parameters #2084
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This PR is stale because it has been open for 60 days with no activity. |
|
Any chance this can get a review? The merge conflict is trivial, and I'll be happy to resolve that when the time comes. |
This adds a `parameters` property to provide mapping parameters that are not explicitly whitelisted otherwise.
This also adds a minimal test for the existing multi-field code, which had no coverage, yet.
ralphm
force-pushed
the
mapping-parameters
branch
from
730c119
to
4390652
Compare
kgeller
approved these changes
Feb 28, 2023
|
Thanks, @kgeller! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When attempting to create a custom mapping for a
date(multi-)field, I found that the ECS tooling doesn't currently support providing theignore_malformedandformatmapping parameters. Even though there is some limited support for certain parameters, these are not consistent between the main field mapping and the multi-field mapping. E.g. thenormalizerparameter is only available for multi-fields.Instead of implementing specific parameters for my use case, this PR adds a new property
parametersto provide any mapping parameter, both for the main field and for multi-fields, along with a minimal test for the multi-field generation code. The existing code can remain as-is, with the minimal sanity checking that is in place, for backwards compatibility.