Enforce soft deletes #1903
Enforce soft deletes #1903
Conversation
This commit enforces soft deletes as required in 2.0.0. Signed-off-by: Nicholas Walter Knize <[email protected]>
nknize
added
enhancement
|
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
Signed-off-by: Nicholas Walter Knize <[email protected]>
| + request.index() | ||
| + "]." | ||
| if (IndexSettings.INDEX_SOFT_DELETES_SETTING.get(indexSettings) == false | ||
| && IndexMetadata.SETTING_INDEX_VERSION_CREATED.get(indexSettings).onOrAfter(Version.V_2_0_0)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm a bit confused...this is server code that will run inside a version 2.0.0+ instance of the service. Why is this check necessary? Why can't the check just be
if (!IndexSettings.INDEX_SOFT_DELETES_SETTING.get(indexSettings)) {
throw ...
}
Taking it a bit further, why can't we just remove the index.soft_deletes.enabled setting all together so that it cannot be specified since the soft delete behavior is not configurable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@andrross afaik when migrating from let say 1.x to 2.x, you could still use "old" index from 1.x in 2.x: in this case the version of the index will be 1.x, with all the settings implied. If we drop this check, the "old" indices would behave differently (or fail to load if we throw an exception).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see. So we'll continue to support the "soft delete disabled behavior" after this change because it is possible to migrate an index from an older version with index.soft_deletes.enabled=false to a 2.0+ version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, this is my understanding
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Correct. We need to be able to support the parameter through 2.x for bwc purposes.
This PR enforces soft deletes as required in 2.0.0.
relates #1674