Skip to content

dev_doc: add evolution of index management #16685

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rubvs
Copy link
Contributor

@rubvs rubvs commented Apr 21, 2025

Closes #14177

Add an overview and timeline for the evolution of index management in APM Server.

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Apr 21, 2025

This pull request does not have a backport label. Could you fix it @rubvs? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

  • backport-7.17 is the label to automatically backport to the 7.17 branch.
  • backport-8./d is the label to automatically backport to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit.
  • backport-9./d is the label to automatically backport to the 9./d branch. /d is the digit.
  • backport-active-all is the label that automatically backports to all active branches.
  • backport-active-8 is the label that automatically backports to all active minor branches for the 8 major.
  • backport-active-9 is the label that automatically backports to all active minor branches for the 9 major.

@rubvs rubvs force-pushed the doc-index-management branch from 9eed965 to b456a58 Compare April 21, 2025 20:24
@rubvs rubvs requested review from axw and 1pkg April 21, 2025 21:07
@rubvs rubvs marked this pull request as ready for review April 21, 2025 21:07
@rubvs rubvs requested a review from a team as a code owner April 21, 2025 21:07
Copy link
Contributor

@simitt simitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Requesting a few smaller changes.

@rubvs rubvs requested review from simitt and carsonip April 28, 2025 19:59
Copy link
Contributor

@simitt simitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a good start, but it needs more clarification before merging.


The switch to the ES apm plugin caused several issues for our customers, see [Elastic APM Known Issues](https://www.elastic.co/docs/release-notes/apm/known-issues).

- **Sep 16, 2024 (v8.16.0)**
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The below fixes do not all belong to 8.16.0, and you list a version for every point, so I'd remove this header.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Related to my comment above: #16685 (comment)

- PR [#116219](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/116219) will trigger a lazy rollover of existing data streams regardless of whether the index template is being created or updated.
- This ensures that the apm-data plugin will roll over data streams that were previously using the Fleet integration package.
- **Nov 13, 2024 (v8.17.0)**
- With the new index templates, if you were not using any custom ILM Policy, APM data will obey to the new Data stream Lifecycle instead of ILM.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In 8.17.0 DSL was removed, it's always ILM going forward. What made you think it is still DSL for the default case?

- This ensures that the apm-data plugin will roll over data streams that were previously using the Fleet integration package.
- **Nov 13, 2024 (v8.17.0)**
- With the new index templates, if you were not using any custom ILM Policy, APM data will obey to the new Data stream Lifecycle instead of ILM.
- The default ILM Policies of APM are removed if not in use. If you defined a custom ILM policy via a `@custom` component template, the ILM policy will be preserved and preferred to DSL.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Default ILM policies are not removed.

- **Nov 13, 2024 (v8.17.0)**
- With the new index templates, if you were not using any custom ILM Policy, APM data will obey to the new Data stream Lifecycle instead of ILM.
- The default ILM Policies of APM are removed if not in use. If you defined a custom ILM policy via a `@custom` component template, the ILM policy will be preserved and preferred to DSL.
- In [#115687](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/115687), we moved to adding default ILM policies and switch to ILM for apm-data plugin, instead of just having a fallback as outlined in [#112759](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/112759).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The apm-data plugin is used for apm-server and for serverless; maybe this caused some confusion on some of the PRs.

- **May 26, 2024 (v8.15.0)**
- In [#9949](https://github.com/elastic/integrations/pull/9949) all datastreams was removed from APM Integrations.

### 8.x - (Fixes & Improvements)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I find the timelines below confusing as it is right now.
@lahsivjar given that you worked on several of the PRs, could you help add some clarification and give this a sanity check?

@rubvs rubvs requested a review from lahsivjar May 2, 2025 13:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[dev_docs] Document index management change timeline
3 participants