Skip to content

Conversation

stefnestor
Copy link
Contributor

👋 howdy, team!

I have the internal belief/understanding that ILM Explain's age calculates based off rollover time fall back index creation time (or ILM creation time override settings). However, I'm not able to find that currently in existing docs, so adding it to ILM > Phase Transitions. (Also adding column name references for doc searchability.)

TIA!

Background

This surfaced from:

(doc) The age of the indexed used to transition to the next phase (in this case it is the same with the age of the index).

Uh... I'm not actually(/currently) finding an official Elastic doc confirming age works off index creation time override to rollover time, but I know that's correspondingly true from the blog I wrote that LeeH had signed-off

(blog) Common issue 3: min_age calculation clarification
When working with customers, I have seen confusion about how min_age works. The min_age must increase between subsequent phases. If rollover is used, min_age is calculated off the rollover date. This is because rollover generates a new index and the new index’s creation date is used in the calculation. Otherwise, min_age is calculated off the original index’s creation date.

We're working to tighten-ship on docs+api for users to self-service understanding

(internal) The age of an index is calculated based on:

  • The index_creation_date_millis of the index IF it did not go through hot.rollover
  • The rollover time of the index (TODO: time_since_index_rollover) IF it went through hot.rollover (noting rollover resets age)
  • Index ILM Setting overrides index.lifecycle.origination_date or index.lifecycle.parse_origination_date (related blog)

Related: #103660, #103659

👋 howdy, team! 

I have the internal belief/understanding that [ILM Explain](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/ilm-explain-lifecycle.html)'s `age` calculates based off rollover time fall back index creation time (or ILM creation time override settings). However, I'm not able to find that currently in existing docs, so adding it to [ILM > Phase Transitions](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/8.11/ilm-index-lifecycle.html#ilm-phase-transitions) 

Background: This relates to 

> ([doc](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/getting-started-index-lifecycle-management.html#ilm-gs-check-progress)) The `age` of the indexed used to transition to the next phase (in this case it is the same with the age of the index).

Uh... I'm not actually(/currently) finding an official Elastic doc confirming `age` works off index creation time override to rollover time, but I know that's correspondingly true from the blog I wrote that LeeH had signed-off

> ([blog](https://www.elastic.co/blog/troubleshooting-elasticsearch-ilm-common-issues-and-fixes)) **Common issue 3: min_age calculation clarification**
> When working with customers, I have seen confusion about how `min_age` works. The min_age [must increase](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/ilm-index-lifecycle.html#ilm-phase-transitions) between subsequent phases. If rollover is used, min_age is calculated off the rollover date. This is because rollover generates a new index and the new index’s creation date is used in the calculation. Otherwise, min_age is calculated off the original index’s creation date.

We're working to tighten-ship on docs+api for users to self-service understanding

> (internal link) The `age` of an index is calculated based on:
> - The `index_creation_date_millis` of the index IF it did not go through `hot.rollover`
> - The rollover time of the index (TODO: `time_since_index_rollover`) IF it went through `hot.rollover` (noting rollover resets `age`)
> - Index ILM Setting overrides `index.lifecycle.origination_date` or `index.lifecycle.parse_origination_date` (related [blog](https://www.elastic.co/blog/control-ilm-phase-transition-timings-using-origination-date))
@stefnestor stefnestor added >enhancement >docs General docs changes :Data Management/ILM+SLM Index and Snapshot lifecycle management Team:Data Management Meta label for data/management team Team:Docs Meta label for docs team Supportability Improve our (devs, SREs, support eng, users) ability to troubleshoot/self-service product better. labels Dec 21, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

Documentation preview:

@elasticsearchmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

@stefnestor please enable the option "Allow edits and access to secrets by maintainers" on your PR. For more information, see the documentation.

@elasticsearchmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-docs (Team:Docs)

@elasticsearchmachine elasticsearchmachine added v8.11.4 external-contributor Pull request authored by a developer outside the Elasticsearch team labels Dec 21, 2023
@elasticsearchmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-data-management (Team:Data Management)

@stefnestor stefnestor requested a review from dakrone December 21, 2023 18:23
Copy link
Member

@dakrone dakrone left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, I left one suggestion

Co-authored-by: Lee Hinman <dakrone@users.noreply.github.com>
@stefnestor stefnestor merged commit 2113ff3 into 8.11 Dec 23, 2023
@stefnestor stefnestor deleted the stefnestor-patch-4 branch December 23, 2023 03:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

:Data Management/ILM+SLM Index and Snapshot lifecycle management >docs General docs changes >enhancement external-contributor Pull request authored by a developer outside the Elasticsearch team Supportability Improve our (devs, SREs, support eng, users) ability to troubleshoot/self-service product better. Team:Data Management Meta label for data/management team Team:Docs Meta label for docs team v8.11.4

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants