[ML] No need to add state doc mapping on job open in 7.x #37759
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
When upgrading from 5.4 to 5.5 to 6.7 (inclusive) it was necessary to ensure there was a mapping for type "doc" on the ML state index before opening a job. This was because 5.4 created a multi-type ML state index. In version 7.x we can be sure that any such 5.4 index is no longer in use. It would have had to be reindexed into the 6.x index format prior to the upgrade to version 7.x.
Collaborator
|
Pinging @elastic/ml-core |
Author
|
This change is a followup to #37706 (comment) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 upgrading from 5.4 to 5.5 to 6.7 (inclusive) it was
necessary to ensure there was a mapping for type "doc" on
the ML state index before opening a job. This was because
5.4 created a multi-type ML state index.
In version 7.x we can be sure that any such 5.4 index is no
longer in use. It would have had to be reindexed into the
6.x index format prior to the upgrade to version 7.x.