INGEST: Document Pipeline Processor #33418
Conversation
original-brownbear
commented
Sep 5, 2018
original-brownbear
commented
- Added documentation for Pipeline Processor
- Relates ingest: Documentation improvements for ingest node #33188
* Added documentation for Pipeline Processor * Relates elastic#33188
original-brownbear
added
>docs
|
Pinging @elastic/es-core-infra |
| | Name | Required | Default | Description | ||
| | `pipeline` | yes | - | The name of the pipeline to execute | ||
| |====== | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can I suggest to use pipelineA and pipelineB (or the like) as examples to avoid inner/outer which (to me at least) suggests a required relationship between the two pipelines.
| } | ||
| -------------------------------------------------- | ||
| // TESTRESPONSE | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It may also be of value to show the final document here (in addition to, or in replacement of the index reponse).
|
@original-brownbear - 2 minor suggestions, otherwise LGTM @rjernst - did you want to review ? |
| -------------------------------------------------- | ||
| { | ||
| "pipeline": { | ||
| "pipeline": "inner-pipeline" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking at actual requests, this looks quite confusing having "pipeline" inside "pipeline" (we used to have similar for script with the script query containing script). I wonder if we could quickly rename the parameter to name or something similar before 6.5 branch is cut?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@rjernst sure that makes sense. Should I just do it in this PR or do you want a separate one?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would do a quick separate one, since this one is marked as docs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok incoming :)
* Added documentation for Pipeline Processor * Relates elastic#33188
* Added documentation for Pipeline Processor * Relates #33188
|
6.5 backport: 27ba45e |
* Added documentation for Pipeline Processor * Relates #33188
5 participants
