Add null and ignore_missing check to handle event.original field.

[ritalwar]

Proposed commit message

This PR add null and ignore_missing check to handle event.original field in multiple packages which are as follows:

• ActiveMQ
• CoreDns
• IBMMQ
• MongoDB
• Salesforce
• Spring_Boot
• vSphere

Checklist

• I have reviewed tips for building integrations and this pull request is aligned with them.
• I have verified that all data streams collect metrics or logs.
• I have added an entry to my package's changelog.yml file.
• I have verified that Kibana version constraints are current according to guidelines.

Related issues

• Relates Add checks to rename processor for the message field for all Observability Integrations #7822

Screenshots

[elasticmachine]

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

• Start Time: 2023-12-01T09:03:58.907+0000

• Duration: 20 min 9 sec

Test stats 🧪

Test	Results
Failed	0
Passed	159
Skipped	0
Total	159

🤖 GitHub comments

Expand to view the GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

• /test : Re-trigger the build.

[elasticmachine]

🌐 Coverage report

Name	Metrics % (covered/total)	Diff
Packages	100.0% (16/16)	💚
Files	100.0% (19/19)	💚 15.385
Classes	100.0% (19/19)	💚 15.385
Methods	98.19% (217/221)	👍 8.36
Lines	94.12% (2529/2687)	👍 4.905
Conditionals	100.0% (0/0)	💚

[muthu-mps]

@ritalwar - As we have the ignore_missing check in most places. Can we adopt the same option here as well and replace the ignore_empty_value with ignore_missing option?

[ritalwar]

@muthu-mps In the Rename processor, we use ignore_missing, while in the Set processor, ignore_empty_value serves the same purpose.

[muthu-mps]

Just for clarity, We will have RENAME and SET processors for integrations. These are defined previously and will be maintained as it is and both the processor does the same function.

[ritalwar]

The only difference between SET and RENAME in this scenario is that with SET, we end up having two fields, namely message and event.original. Ideally, we should eliminate the message field after Set. However, it should apply to other such fields as well, and the removal of the message field is not being addressed as part of this PR.

[muthu-mps]

LGTM!

[ishleenk17]

@ritalwar : In some plavces there were set processors, in some rename. Whats the general guidance you have followed here ?

[ritalwar]

@ritalwar : In some plavces there were set processors, in some rename. Whats the general guidance you have followed here ?

I haven't modified any processors; I've maintained the set and rename operations as they were and simply introduced these checks.

[ishleenk17]

@ritalwar : In some plavces there were set processors, in some rename. Whats the general guidance you have followed here ?

I haven't modified any processors; I've maintained the set and rename operations as they were and simply introduced these checks.

Ok, looks good!

[elasticmachine]

Package activemq - 0.14.1 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=activemq

[elasticmachine]

Package coredns - 0.6.1 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=coredns

[elasticmachine]

Package ibmmq - 1.2.4 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=ibmmq

[elasticmachine]

Package mongodb - 1.12.1 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=mongodb

[elasticmachine]

Package salesforce - 0.12.1 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=salesforce

[elasticmachine]

Package spring_boot - 1.2.1 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=spring_boot

[elasticmachine]

Package vsphere - 1.9.2 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=vsphere