metron-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Leet <justinjl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Dropping support for elastic 2.x
Date Wed, 04 Oct 2017 17:07:39 GMT
ES should be upgradeable without wiping.  It's the client itself that isn't
backwards compatible.  It'll require both an upgrade of Metron and an ES
cluster.

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Casey Stella <cestella@gmail.com> wrote:

> So, how would this work in an upgrade scenario that does not involve losing
> the existing indexed data?
>
> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Michael Miklavcic <
> michael.miklavcic@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The client I'm currently working on moving towards would *not* be
> backwards
> > compatible.
> > https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/client/java-
> > rest/current/java-rest-high-compatibility.html
> >
> > "
> > The High Level Client is guaranteed to be able to communicate with any
> > Elasticsearch node running on the same major version and greater or equal
> > minor version. It doesn’t need to be in the same minor version as the
> > Elasticsearch nodes it communicates with, as it is forward compatible
> > meaning that it supports communicating with later versions of
> Elasticsearch
> > than the one it was developed for.
> >
> > The 5.6 client can communicate with any 5.6.x Elasticsearch node.
> Previous
> > 5.x minor versions like 5.5.x, 5.4.x etc. are not (fully) supported.
> > "
> >
> > Best,
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Simon Elliston Ball <
> > simon@simonellistonball.com> wrote:
> >
> > > A number of people are currently working on upgrading the ES support in
> > > Metron to 5.x (including the clients, and the mpack managed install).
> > >
> > > Would anyone have any objections to dropping formal support for 2.x as
> a
> > > result of this work? In theory the clients should be backward
> compatible
> > > against older data stores, so metron could be upgraded without needing
> an
> > > elastic upgrade.
> > >
> > > In practice, we would need to do pretty extensive testing and I
> wouldn’t
> > > want us to have to code around long term support on older clients if
> > no-one
> > > in the community cares enough about the older ES. Do we think there is
> a
> > > case to be made for maintaining long term support for older clients?
> > >
> > > Simon
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message