Skip to content

Rivers: Add back deletion of river content on river removal.#10251

Closed
rjernst wants to merge 1 commit intoelastic:masterfrom
rjernst:fix/river-type-deletion
Closed

Rivers: Add back deletion of river content on river removal.#10251
rjernst wants to merge 1 commit intoelastic:masterfrom
rjernst:fix/river-type-deletion

Conversation

@rjernst
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@rjernst rjernst commented Mar 25, 2015

In #8877, the deletion of the type associated with a river was
removed. This change adds back the removal using a scan search
along with bulk delete requests.

In elastic#8877, the deletion of the type associated with a river was
removed. This change adds back the removal using a scan search
along with bulk delete requests.
@rjernst
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

rjernst commented Mar 25, 2015

@kimchy Is this what you were thinking? Can you suggest how to test? The tests for rivers seem...light.

@s1monw
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

s1monw commented Apr 2, 2015

@rjernst take a look at IndicesTTLService.PurgerThread#purgeShards I think we should use the bulk to drive the deletion?

@s1monw s1monw self-assigned this Apr 2, 2015
@dadoonet
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ha! I think I now understand why I can see a test failing in couchdb river in master.
As the river is not really removed when we remove _meta document, test is failing.

Related code in couchdb-river is https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch-river-couchdb/blob/master/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/river/couchdb/CouchdbRiverIntegrationTest.java#L456-457

I guess the test will be fix automagically when this PR will be merged.

@rjernst
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

rjernst commented Jun 20, 2015

Closing since rivers have been removed from master.

@rjernst rjernst closed this Jun 20, 2015
@rjernst rjernst deleted the fix/river-type-deletion branch September 18, 2020 03:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants