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

[Backport 2.x] [Search Pipelines] Split search pipeline processor factories by type #7669

Merged

Conversation

msfroh
Copy link
Collaborator

@msfroh msfroh commented May 22, 2023

Backport eb51f2b from #7597.

Added a commit to update the version check (and remove the TODO talking about updating the version check).

github-actions bot and others added 2 commits May 22, 2023 20:21
…pensearch-project#7597)

In the initial search pipelines commit, I threw request and response
processor factories into one combined map. I think that was a mistake.

We should embrace type-safety by making sure that the kind of processor
is clear from end to end. As we add more processor types (e.g. search
phase processor), throwing them all in one big map would get messier.

As a bonus, we'll be able to reuse processor names across different
types of processor.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
(cherry picked from commit eb51f2b)
Signed-off-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
We needed to check for onOrBefore 2.8 in order to pass back-compat
tests on main. Now that we're backporting to 2.8, we need to update the
check (on 2.x and on main).

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
@msfroh msfroh changed the title Backport/backport 7597 to 2.x [Backport 2.x] [Search Pipelines] Split search pipeline processor factories by type May 22, 2023
msfroh added a commit to msfroh/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request May 22, 2023
Now that we've backported the SearchPipelineInfo serialization change to
2.x ahead of the 2.8 release, we need to update the compatibility check
from <=2.8 to <2.8, as mentioned in the previous TODO.

This change should be merged (immediately) after
opensearch-project#7669.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
@msfroh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

msfroh commented May 22, 2023

Once this PR (#7669) is merged, we should more or less immediately merge #7672.

Copy link
Collaborator

@nknize nknize left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Gradle Check (Jenkins) Run Completed with:

@msfroh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

msfroh commented May 22, 2023

Test Result (1 failure / ±0)
org.opensearch.search.SearchWeightedRoutingIT.testStrictWeightedRoutingWithCustomString

The specific failure is:

 java.lang.AssertionError
	at __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([C69981F124D97109:931EACA63F04B615]:0)
	at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:87)
	at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:42)
	at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:53)
	at org.opensearch.search.SearchWeightedRoutingIT.assertSearchInAZ(SearchWeightedRoutingIT.java:844)
	at org.opensearch.search.SearchWeightedRoutingIT.testStrictWeightedRoutingWithCustomString(SearchWeightedRoutingIT.java:1124)

It's not the same test as #5957, but I suspect it's related.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Gradle Check (Jenkins) Run Completed with:

  • RESULT: UNSTABLE ❕
  • TEST FAILURES:
      2 org.opensearch.search.SearchWeightedRoutingIT.testStrictWeightedRoutingWithCustomString

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 22, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #7669 (8a44204) into 2.x (f4aa5a4) will decrease coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is 83.72%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##                2.x    #7669      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     70.33%   70.25%   -0.08%     
+ Complexity    60001    59904      -97     
============================================
  Files          4885     4885              
  Lines        288433   288475      +42     
  Branches      41948    41956       +8     
============================================
- Hits         202861   202674     -187     
- Misses        68560    68795     +235     
+ Partials      17012    17006       -6     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...h/pipeline/common/FilterQueryRequestProcessor.java 85.29% <ø> (ø)
.../pipeline/common/RenameFieldResponseProcessor.java 94.59% <ø> (ø)
...eline/common/SearchPipelineCommonModulePlugin.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...a/org/opensearch/plugins/SearchPipelinePlugin.java 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...java/org/opensearch/search/pipeline/Processor.java 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...opensearch/search/pipeline/SearchPipelineInfo.java 72.41% <84.44%> (+18.84%) ⬆️
...nsearch/search/pipeline/SearchPipelineService.java 82.77% <88.23%> (-0.04%) ⬇️
.../java/org/opensearch/search/pipeline/Pipeline.java 86.20% <100.00%> (+1.59%) ⬆️

... and 475 files with indirect coverage changes

@peterzhuamazon peterzhuamazon merged commit 958b6be into opensearch-project:2.x May 22, 2023
msfroh added a commit to msfroh/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request May 23, 2023
Now that we've backported the SearchPipelineInfo serialization change to
2.x ahead of the 2.8 release, we need to update the compatibility check
from <=2.8 to <2.8, as mentioned in the previous TODO.

This change should be merged (immediately) after
opensearch-project#7669.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
msfroh added a commit to msfroh/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request May 23, 2023
Now that we've backported the SearchPipelineInfo serialization change to
2.x ahead of the 2.8 release, we need to update the compatibility check
from <=2.8 to <2.8, as mentioned in the previous TODO.

This change should be merged (immediately) after
opensearch-project#7669.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
msfroh added a commit to msfroh/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request May 23, 2023
Now that we've backported the SearchPipelineInfo serialization change to
2.x ahead of the 2.8 release, we need to update the compatibility check
from <=2.8 to <2.8, as mentioned in the previous TODO.

This change should be merged (immediately) after
opensearch-project#7669.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
reta pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 23, 2023
Now that we've backported the SearchPipelineInfo serialization change to
2.x ahead of the 2.8 release, we need to update the compatibility check
from <=2.8 to <2.8, as mentioned in the previous TODO.

This change should be merged (immediately) after
#7669.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
suranjay pushed a commit to suranjay/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request May 29, 2023
Now that we've backported the SearchPipelineInfo serialization change to
2.x ahead of the 2.8 release, we need to update the compatibility check
from <=2.8 to <2.8, as mentioned in the previous TODO.

This change should be merged (immediately) after
opensearch-project#7669.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
stephen-crawford pushed a commit to stephen-crawford/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request May 31, 2023
Now that we've backported the SearchPipelineInfo serialization change to
2.x ahead of the 2.8 release, we need to update the compatibility check
from <=2.8 to <2.8, as mentioned in the previous TODO.

This change should be merged (immediately) after
opensearch-project#7669.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
shiv0408 pushed a commit to Gaurav614/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2024
Now that we've backported the SearchPipelineInfo serialization change to
2.x ahead of the 2.8 release, we need to update the compatibility check
from <=2.8 to <2.8, as mentioned in the previous TODO.

This change should be merged (immediately) after
opensearch-project#7669.

Signed-off-by: Michael Froh <froh@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Shivansh Arora <hishiv@amazon.com>
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