Auto increase fields limit of the alert indices#216719
Merged
ersin-erdal merged 33 commits intoelastic:mainfrom Apr 15, 2025
Merged
Auto increase fields limit of the alert indices#216719ersin-erdal merged 33 commits intoelastic:mainfrom
ersin-erdal merged 33 commits intoelastic:mainfrom
Conversation
ersin-erdal
added
release_note:skip
…al/kibana into 283-auto-increase-fields-limit
…al/kibana into 283-auto-increase-fields-limit
Contributor
|
Pinging @elastic/response-ops (Team:ResponseOps) |
ymao1
reviewed
Apr 9, 2025
Contributor
ymao1
left a comment
ymao1
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Verified works as described 🎉 . Left a few comments
| import type { ElasticsearchClient } from '@kbn/core/server'; | ||
| import type { IndicesGetIndexTemplateIndexTemplateItem } from '@elastic/elasticsearch/lib/api/types'; | ||
|
|
||
| export const updateIndexTemplateFiledsLimit = ({ |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| export const updateIndexTemplateFiledsLimit = ({ | |
| export const updateIndexTemplateFieldsLimit = ({ |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we update the filename as well?
| return; | ||
| } catch (err) { | ||
| try { | ||
| const newLimit = await increaseFiledsLimit({ |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| const newLimit = await increaseFiledsLimit({ | |
| const newLimit = await increaseFieldsLimit({ |
...ck/platform/plugins/shared/alerting/server/alerts_service/lib/create_concrete_write_index.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| { logger } | ||
| ); | ||
| logger.info( | ||
| `total_fields.limit of ${alias} has been increased form ${exceededLimit} to ${newLimit}` |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| `total_fields.limit of ${alias} has been increased form ${exceededLimit} to ${newLimit}` | |
| `total_fields.limit of ${alias} has been increased from ${exceededLimit} to ${newLimit}` |
...ck/platform/plugins/shared/alerting/server/alerts_service/lib/create_concrete_write_index.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ck/platform/plugins/shared/alerting/server/alerts_service/lib/create_concrete_write_index.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| } | ||
| } catch (e) { | ||
| logger.error( | ||
| `An error occured while incresing total_fields.limit of ${alias} - ${e.message}`, |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| `An error occured while incresing total_fields.limit of ${alias} - ${e.message}`, | |
| `An error occured while increasing total_fields.limit of ${alias} - ${e.message}`, |
Contributor
|
Looks like this PR has backport PRs but they still haven't been merged. Please merge them ASAP to keep the branches relatively in sync. |
ersin-erdal
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2025
) # Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `9.0`: - [Auto increase fields limit of the alert indices (#216719)](#216719) <!--- Backport version: 9.6.6 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sorenlouv/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Ersin Erdal","email":"92688503+ersin-erdal@users.noreply.github.com"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2025-04-15T07:38:27Z","message":"Auto increase fields limit of the alert indices (#216719)\n\nThis PR adds the auto-increase the fields limit on startup when an\nalerts index reaches its limits because of the dynamic fields.\n\n# To verify:\nTo be able to test this PR we need a rule type that adds dynamic fields.\nI used the custom threshold rule for this:\n\nGo to the custom threshold rule type definition and change its\nalerts.mappings to:\n```\n mappings: {\n // dynamic: true,\n fieldMap: {\n 'kibana.alerting.grouping': {\n type: 'object',\n dynamic: true,\n array: false,\n required: false,\n },\n ...legacyExperimentalFieldMap,\n ...Array(412)\n .fill(0)\n .reduce((acc, val, i) => {\n acc[`${i + 1}`] = { type: 'keyword', array: false, required: false };\n return acc;\n }, {}),\n },\n dynamicTemplates: [\n {\n strings_as_keywords: {\n path_match: 'kibana.alert.grouping.*',\n match_mapping_type: 'string',\n mapping: {\n type: 'keyword',\n ignore_above: 1024,\n },\n },\n },\n ],\n },\n ```\n \n Above changes adds 412 dummy fields to the alerts index to make it close to reach its fields limit (default: 2500).\n And makes everything under `kibana.alert.grouping` path to be added to the index as dynamic fields.\n \n Then apply the below changes to the custom threshold rule executor:\n ```\n const grouping: Record<string, string> = {};\n groups?.forEach((groupObj) => (grouping[groupObj.field] = groupObj.value));\n \n const { uuid, start } = alertsClient.report({\n id: `${group}`,\n actionGroup: actionGroupId,\n payload: {\n [ALERT_REASON]: reason,\n [ALERT_EVALUATION_VALUES]: evaluationValues,\n [ALERT_EVALUATION_THRESHOLD]: threshold,\n [ALERT_GROUP]: groups,\n // @ts-ignore\n ['kibana.alerting.grouping']: grouping,\n ...flattenAdditionalContext(additionalContext),\n ...getEcsGroups(groups),\n },\n }); \n ```\n \nAbove changes add the selected groups under `kibana.alerting.grouping` path.\n \nThen: \n- Run ES with ` path.data=../your-local-data-path` to keep the data for the next start.\n- Run Kibana\n- Create a custom threshold rule that generates an alert and has at least 2 groups.\n- Let the rule run.\n- Go to `Stack Management` > `Index Management` and search for observability threshold index.\n- Check its mappings, it should show the dummy fields you have added to the rule type and the first grouping you have selected while you were creating the rule type.\n- Go to the Dev Tools and find your alert in the `.internal.alerts-observability.threshold.alerts-default-000001` index.\nThe other groups you have selected should be saved under `_ignored` field:\n```\n\"_ignored\": [\n \"kibana.alerting.grouping.host.name\"\n],\n```\n- Stop Kibana\n- increase the number of dummy fields you have added to the rule type definition:\n```\n ...Array(412) <-- make this greater than 412\n .fill(0)\n```\n- Start kibana again.\n- The new fields should be added to the mappings. Check them on `Stack Management` > `Index Management` \n- Check also the index settings: `Stack Management` > `Index Management` > `.internal.alerts-observability.threshold.alerts-default-000001` > settings tab.\n- `\"mapping\" > \"total_fields\" > \"limit\" ` should be greater than 2500\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"f6c30d6b9ad1a46a73cc5c084a5e70051d78a7cb","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.1.0$":"main","^v8.19.0$":"8.x","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:skip","Team:ResponseOps","v9.0.0","backport:version","v9.1.0","v8.19.0"],"title":"Auto increase fields limit of the alert indices","number":216719,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/216719","mergeCommit":{"message":"Auto increase fields limit of the alert indices (#216719)\n\nThis PR adds the auto-increase the fields limit on startup when an\nalerts index reaches its limits because of the dynamic fields.\n\n# To verify:\nTo be able to test this PR we need a rule type that adds dynamic fields.\nI used the custom threshold rule for this:\n\nGo to the custom threshold rule type definition and change its\nalerts.mappings to:\n```\n mappings: {\n // dynamic: true,\n fieldMap: {\n 'kibana.alerting.grouping': {\n type: 'object',\n dynamic: true,\n array: false,\n required: false,\n },\n ...legacyExperimentalFieldMap,\n ...Array(412)\n .fill(0)\n .reduce((acc, val, i) => {\n acc[`${i + 1}`] = { type: 'keyword', array: false, required: false };\n return acc;\n }, {}),\n },\n dynamicTemplates: [\n {\n strings_as_keywords: {\n path_match: 'kibana.alert.grouping.*',\n match_mapping_type: 'string',\n mapping: {\n type: 'keyword',\n ignore_above: 1024,\n },\n },\n },\n ],\n },\n ```\n \n Above changes adds 412 dummy fields to the alerts index to make it close to reach its fields limit (default: 2500).\n And makes everything under `kibana.alert.grouping` path to be added to the index as dynamic fields.\n \n Then apply the below changes to the custom threshold rule executor:\n ```\n const grouping: Record<string, string> = {};\n groups?.forEach((groupObj) => (grouping[groupObj.field] = groupObj.value));\n \n const { uuid, start } = alertsClient.report({\n id: `${group}`,\n actionGroup: actionGroupId,\n payload: {\n [ALERT_REASON]: reason,\n [ALERT_EVALUATION_VALUES]: evaluationValues,\n [ALERT_EVALUATION_THRESHOLD]: threshold,\n [ALERT_GROUP]: groups,\n // @ts-ignore\n ['kibana.alerting.grouping']: grouping,\n ...flattenAdditionalContext(additionalContext),\n ...getEcsGroups(groups),\n },\n }); \n ```\n \nAbove changes add the selected groups under `kibana.alerting.grouping` path.\n \nThen: \n- Run ES with ` path.data=../your-local-data-path` to keep the data for the next start.\n- Run Kibana\n- Create a custom threshold rule that generates an alert and has at least 2 groups.\n- Let the rule run.\n- Go to `Stack Management` > `Index Management` and search for observability threshold index.\n- Check its mappings, it should show the dummy fields you have added to the rule type and the first grouping you have selected while you were creating the rule type.\n- Go to the Dev Tools and find your alert in the `.internal.alerts-observability.threshold.alerts-default-000001` index.\nThe other groups you have selected should be saved under `_ignored` field:\n```\n\"_ignored\": [\n \"kibana.alerting.grouping.host.name\"\n],\n```\n- Stop Kibana\n- increase the number of dummy fields you have added to the rule type definition:\n```\n ...Array(412) <-- make this greater than 412\n .fill(0)\n```\n- Start kibana again.\n- The new fields should be added to the mappings. Check them on `Stack Management` > `Index Management` \n- Check also the index settings: `Stack Management` > `Index Management` > `.internal.alerts-observability.threshold.alerts-default-000001` > settings tab.\n- `\"mapping\" > \"total_fields\" > \"limit\" ` should be greater than 2500\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"f6c30d6b9ad1a46a73cc5c084a5e70051d78a7cb"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["9.0","8.x"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"9.0","label":"v9.0.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"},{"branch":"main","label":"v9.1.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.1.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/216719","number":216719,"mergeCommit":{"message":"Auto increase fields limit of the alert indices (#216719)\n\nThis PR adds the auto-increase the fields limit on startup when an\nalerts index reaches its limits because of the dynamic fields.\n\n# To verify:\nTo be able to test this PR we need a rule type that adds dynamic fields.\nI used the custom threshold rule for this:\n\nGo to the custom threshold rule type definition and change its\nalerts.mappings to:\n```\n mappings: {\n // dynamic: true,\n fieldMap: {\n 'kibana.alerting.grouping': {\n type: 'object',\n dynamic: true,\n array: false,\n required: false,\n },\n ...legacyExperimentalFieldMap,\n ...Array(412)\n .fill(0)\n .reduce((acc, val, i) => {\n acc[`${i + 1}`] = { type: 'keyword', array: false, required: false };\n return acc;\n }, {}),\n },\n dynamicTemplates: [\n {\n strings_as_keywords: {\n path_match: 'kibana.alert.grouping.*',\n match_mapping_type: 'string',\n mapping: {\n type: 'keyword',\n ignore_above: 1024,\n },\n },\n },\n ],\n },\n ```\n \n Above changes adds 412 dummy fields to the alerts index to make it close to reach its fields limit (default: 2500).\n And makes everything under `kibana.alert.grouping` path to be added to the index as dynamic fields.\n \n Then apply the below changes to the custom threshold rule executor:\n ```\n const grouping: Record<string, string> = {};\n groups?.forEach((groupObj) => (grouping[groupObj.field] = groupObj.value));\n \n const { uuid, start } = alertsClient.report({\n id: `${group}`,\n actionGroup: actionGroupId,\n payload: {\n [ALERT_REASON]: reason,\n [ALERT_EVALUATION_VALUES]: evaluationValues,\n [ALERT_EVALUATION_THRESHOLD]: threshold,\n [ALERT_GROUP]: groups,\n // @ts-ignore\n ['kibana.alerting.grouping']: grouping,\n ...flattenAdditionalContext(additionalContext),\n ...getEcsGroups(groups),\n },\n }); \n ```\n \nAbove changes add the selected groups under `kibana.alerting.grouping` path.\n \nThen: \n- Run ES with ` path.data=../your-local-data-path` to keep the data for the next start.\n- Run Kibana\n- Create a custom threshold rule that generates an alert and has at least 2 groups.\n- Let the rule run.\n- Go to `Stack Management` > `Index Management` and search for observability threshold index.\n- Check its mappings, it should show the dummy fields you have added to the rule type and the first grouping you have selected while you were creating the rule type.\n- Go to the Dev Tools and find your alert in the `.internal.alerts-observability.threshold.alerts-default-000001` index.\nThe other groups you have selected should be saved under `_ignored` field:\n```\n\"_ignored\": [\n \"kibana.alerting.grouping.host.name\"\n],\n```\n- Stop Kibana\n- increase the number of dummy fields you have added to the rule type definition:\n```\n ...Array(412) <-- make this greater than 412\n .fill(0)\n```\n- Start kibana again.\n- The new fields should be added to the mappings. Check them on `Stack Management` > `Index Management` \n- Check also the index settings: `Stack Management` > `Index Management` > `.internal.alerts-observability.threshold.alerts-default-000001` > settings tab.\n- `\"mapping\" > \"total_fields\" > \"limit\" ` should be greater than 2500\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"f6c30d6b9ad1a46a73cc5c084a5e70051d78a7cb"}},{"branch":"8.x","label":"v8.19.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v8.19.0$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}] BACKPORT--> --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
|
Looks like this PR has backport PRs but they still haven't been merged. Please merge them ASAP to keep the branches relatively in sync. |
pmuellr
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2025
kibanamachine
removed
the
backport missing
Contributor
|
Note that the backport to |
ersin-erdal
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2025
This PR fixes the bug introduced with: #216719 We didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component template. The fields were still being added because the fields were marked as `dynamic: true` As the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra mapping like `filedname.keyword` This PR fixes that too. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
kibanamachine
added a commit
to kibanamachine/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2025
This PR fixes the bug introduced with: elastic#216719 We didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component template. The fields were still being added because the fields were marked as `dynamic: true` As the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra mapping like `filedname.keyword` This PR fixes that too. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com> (cherry picked from commit 8c6c928)
kibanamachine
added a commit
to kibanamachine/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2025
This PR fixes the bug introduced with: elastic#216719 We didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component template. The fields were still being added because the fields were marked as `dynamic: true` As the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra mapping like `filedname.keyword` This PR fixes that too. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com> (cherry picked from commit 8c6c928)
kibanamachine
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2025
# Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `9.0`: - [Fix ignored dynamic templates (#219875)](#219875) <!--- Backport version: 9.6.6 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sorenlouv/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Ersin Erdal","email":"92688503+ersin-erdal@users.noreply.github.com"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2025-05-02T08:28:56Z","message":"Fix ignored dynamic templates (#219875)\n\nThis PR fixes the bug introduced with:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\nWe didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component\ntemplate.\nThe fields were still being added because the fields were marked as\n`dynamic: true`\n\nAs the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra\nmapping like `filedname.keyword`\nThis PR fixes that too.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"8c6c928e7cde2233da4145c6e712785acf54c5f9","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.1.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:fix","Team:ResponseOps","v9.0.0","backport:version","v9.1.0","v8.19.0","v9.0.1","v9.0.2"],"title":"Fix ignored dynamic templates","number":219875,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/219875","mergeCommit":{"message":"Fix ignored dynamic templates (#219875)\n\nThis PR fixes the bug introduced with:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\nWe didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component\ntemplate.\nThe fields were still being added because the fields were marked as\n`dynamic: true`\n\nAs the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra\nmapping like `filedname.keyword`\nThis PR fixes that too.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"8c6c928e7cde2233da4145c6e712785acf54c5f9"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["9.0","8.19"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"9.0","label":"v9.0.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"},{"branch":"main","label":"v9.1.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.1.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/219875","number":219875,"mergeCommit":{"message":"Fix ignored dynamic templates (#219875)\n\nThis PR fixes the bug introduced with:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\nWe didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component\ntemplate.\nThe fields were still being added because the fields were marked as\n`dynamic: true`\n\nAs the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra\nmapping like `filedname.keyword`\nThis PR fixes that too.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"8c6c928e7cde2233da4145c6e712785acf54c5f9"}},{"branch":"8.19","label":"v8.19.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}] BACKPORT--> --------- Co-authored-by: Ersin Erdal <92688503+ersin-erdal@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ersin Erdal <ersin.erdal@elastic.co>
kibanamachine
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2025
# Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `8.19`: - [Fix ignored dynamic templates (#219875)](#219875) <!--- Backport version: 9.6.6 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sorenlouv/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Ersin Erdal","email":"92688503+ersin-erdal@users.noreply.github.com"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2025-05-02T08:28:56Z","message":"Fix ignored dynamic templates (#219875)\n\nThis PR fixes the bug introduced with:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\nWe didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component\ntemplate.\nThe fields were still being added because the fields were marked as\n`dynamic: true`\n\nAs the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra\nmapping like `filedname.keyword`\nThis PR fixes that too.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"8c6c928e7cde2233da4145c6e712785acf54c5f9","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.1.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:fix","Team:ResponseOps","v9.0.0","backport:version","v9.1.0","v8.19.0","v9.0.1","v9.0.2"],"title":"Fix ignored dynamic templates","number":219875,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/219875","mergeCommit":{"message":"Fix ignored dynamic templates (#219875)\n\nThis PR fixes the bug introduced with:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\nWe didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component\ntemplate.\nThe fields were still being added because the fields were marked as\n`dynamic: true`\n\nAs the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra\nmapping like `filedname.keyword`\nThis PR fixes that too.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"8c6c928e7cde2233da4145c6e712785acf54c5f9"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["9.0","8.19"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"9.0","label":"v9.0.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"},{"branch":"main","label":"v9.1.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.1.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/219875","number":219875,"mergeCommit":{"message":"Fix ignored dynamic templates (#219875)\n\nThis PR fixes the bug introduced with:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\nWe didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component\ntemplate.\nThe fields were still being added because the fields were marked as\n`dynamic: true`\n\nAs the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra\nmapping like `filedname.keyword`\nThis PR fixes that too.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"8c6c928e7cde2233da4145c6e712785acf54c5f9"}},{"branch":"8.19","label":"v8.19.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}] BACKPORT--> --------- Co-authored-by: Ersin Erdal <92688503+ersin-erdal@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ersin Erdal <ersin.erdal@elastic.co>
This was referenced May 15, 2025
maryam-saeidi
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2025
…19826) Relaetd to #183248 Auto-increasing mapping limit PR: #216719 ## Summary In this PR, we are saving dynamically mapped group by information for the custom threshold rule. This consists of two parts: 1. Adding a dynamic field ``` // kibana.alert.grouping [ALERT_GROUPING]: { type: 'object', dynamic: true, array: false, required: false, }, ``` 2. Adding a dynamic template ``` dynamicTemplates: [ { strings_as_keywords: { path_match: 'kibana.alert.grouping.*', match_mapping_type: 'string', mapping: { type: 'keyword', ignore_above: 1024, }, }, }, ], ``` The result of adding these mappings can be seen below: |Alert|Mapping| |---|---| ||| If the number of mapping limit is exceeded, the fields that are not mapped are going to be added to the `_ignored` field, but the value is available in the doc. <img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b84bcf03-b757-4f37-a93f-2559aefa5bcf" width=500 />
maryam-saeidi
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 26, 2025
…ing (#219826) (#221476) # Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `8.19`: - [[Custom threshold] Save group by information with dynamic mapping (#219826)](#219826) <!--- Backport version: 9.6.6 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sorenlouv/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Maryam Saeidi","email":"maryam.saeidi@elastic.co"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2025-05-24T13:17:43Z","message":"[Custom threshold] Save group by information with dynamic mapping (#219826)\n\nRelaetd to #183248 \nAuto-increasing mapping limit PR:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\n## Summary\n\nIn this PR, we are saving dynamically mapped group by information for\nthe custom threshold rule. This consists of two parts:\n\n1. Adding a dynamic field\n```\n// kibana.alert.grouping\n[ALERT_GROUPING]: {\n type: 'object',\n dynamic: true,\n array: false,\n required: false,\n },\n```\n2. Adding a dynamic template\n```\ndynamicTemplates: [\n {\n strings_as_keywords: {\n path_match: 'kibana.alert.grouping.*',\n match_mapping_type: 'string',\n mapping: {\n type: 'keyword',\n ignore_above: 1024,\n },\n },\n },\n ],\n```\n\nThe result of adding these mappings can be seen below:\n|Alert|Mapping|\n|---|---|\n\n|||\n\nIf the number of mapping limit is exceeded, the fields that are not\nmapped are going to be added to the `_ignored` field, but the value is\navailable in the doc.\n\n<img\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b84bcf03-b757-4f37-a93f-2559aefa5bcf\"\nwidth=500 />","sha":"1ec32967f857f6e6e2b9f45f4da5751997254e4e","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.1.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:feature","Team:obs-ux-management","backport:version","v9.1.0","v8.19.0","author:obs-ux-management"],"title":"[Custom threshold] Save group by information with dynamic mapping","number":219826,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/219826","mergeCommit":{"message":"[Custom threshold] Save group by information with dynamic mapping (#219826)\n\nRelaetd to #183248 \nAuto-increasing mapping limit PR:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\n## Summary\n\nIn this PR, we are saving dynamically mapped group by information for\nthe custom threshold rule. This consists of two parts:\n\n1. Adding a dynamic field\n```\n// kibana.alert.grouping\n[ALERT_GROUPING]: {\n type: 'object',\n dynamic: true,\n array: false,\n required: false,\n },\n```\n2. Adding a dynamic template\n```\ndynamicTemplates: [\n {\n strings_as_keywords: {\n path_match: 'kibana.alert.grouping.*',\n match_mapping_type: 'string',\n mapping: {\n type: 'keyword',\n ignore_above: 1024,\n },\n },\n },\n ],\n```\n\nThe result of adding these mappings can be seen below:\n|Alert|Mapping|\n|---|---|\n\n|||\n\nIf the number of mapping limit is exceeded, the fields that are not\nmapped are going to be added to the `_ignored` field, but the value is\navailable in the doc.\n\n<img\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b84bcf03-b757-4f37-a93f-2559aefa5bcf\"\nwidth=500 />","sha":"1ec32967f857f6e6e2b9f45f4da5751997254e4e"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["8.19"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"main","label":"v9.1.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.1.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/219826","number":219826,"mergeCommit":{"message":"[Custom threshold] Save group by information with dynamic mapping (#219826)\n\nRelaetd to #183248 \nAuto-increasing mapping limit PR:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n\n## Summary\n\nIn this PR, we are saving dynamically mapped group by information for\nthe custom threshold rule. This consists of two parts:\n\n1. Adding a dynamic field\n```\n// kibana.alert.grouping\n[ALERT_GROUPING]: {\n type: 'object',\n dynamic: true,\n array: false,\n required: false,\n },\n```\n2. Adding a dynamic template\n```\ndynamicTemplates: [\n {\n strings_as_keywords: {\n path_match: 'kibana.alert.grouping.*',\n match_mapping_type: 'string',\n mapping: {\n type: 'keyword',\n ignore_above: 1024,\n },\n },\n },\n ],\n```\n\nThe result of adding these mappings can be seen below:\n|Alert|Mapping|\n|---|---|\n\n|||\n\nIf the number of mapping limit is exceeded, the fields that are not\nmapped are going to be added to the `_ignored` field, but the value is\navailable in the doc.\n\n<img\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b84bcf03-b757-4f37-a93f-2559aefa5bcf\"\nwidth=500 />","sha":"1ec32967f857f6e6e2b9f45f4da5751997254e4e"}},{"branch":"8.19","label":"v8.19.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}] BACKPORT--> --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
maryam-saeidi
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 28, 2025
Closes #220815 ## Summary This PR adds telemetry for _ignored fields. The goal is to have an alert based on this field and get notified in case a user hits the mapping limit, but by default, we don't expect this to happen. This PR adds `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` field that counts the number of _ignored fields per rule type. In the future, we can extend the telemetry data to also include the actual number of mappings over the limit (there is a [feature request](elastic/elasticsearch#68947) for adding field count information to index API) ### How to test - Add a lot of dynamic fields as mentioned here: #216719 - Create a rule with a custom threshold rule with multiple group by fields to generate an alert with _ignored field - Run the following API and check the value of `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` ``` POST kbn:/internal/telemetry/clusters/_stats?apiVersion=2 { "unencrypted": true, "refreshCache": true } ``` <details> <summary> Here is what it looks like:</summary>   </details> --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
akowalska622
pushed a commit
to akowalska622/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
May 29, 2025
This PR fixes the bug introduced with: elastic#216719 We didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component template. The fields were still being added because the fields were marked as `dynamic: true` As the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra mapping like `filedname.keyword` This PR fixes that too. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
akowalska622
pushed a commit
to akowalska622/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
May 29, 2025
…astic#219826) Relaetd to elastic#183248 Auto-increasing mapping limit PR: elastic#216719 ## Summary In this PR, we are saving dynamically mapped group by information for the custom threshold rule. This consists of two parts: 1. Adding a dynamic field ``` // kibana.alert.grouping [ALERT_GROUPING]: { type: 'object', dynamic: true, array: false, required: false, }, ``` 2. Adding a dynamic template ``` dynamicTemplates: [ { strings_as_keywords: { path_match: 'kibana.alert.grouping.*', match_mapping_type: 'string', mapping: { type: 'keyword', ignore_above: 1024, }, }, }, ], ``` The result of adding these mappings can be seen below: |Alert|Mapping| |---|---| ||| If the number of mapping limit is exceeded, the fields that are not mapped are going to be added to the `_ignored` field, but the value is available in the doc. <img src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b84bcf03-b757-4f37-a93f-2559aefa5bcf" width=500 />
akowalska622
pushed a commit
to akowalska622/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
May 29, 2025
Closes elastic#220815 ## Summary This PR adds telemetry for _ignored fields. The goal is to have an alert based on this field and get notified in case a user hits the mapping limit, but by default, we don't expect this to happen. This PR adds `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` field that counts the number of _ignored fields per rule type. In the future, we can extend the telemetry data to also include the actual number of mappings over the limit (there is a [feature request](elastic/elasticsearch#68947) for adding field count information to index API) ### How to test - Add a lot of dynamic fields as mentioned here: elastic#216719 - Create a rule with a custom threshold rule with multiple group by fields to generate an alert with _ignored field - Run the following API and check the value of `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` ``` POST kbn:/internal/telemetry/clusters/_stats?apiVersion=2 { "unencrypted": true, "refreshCache": true } ``` <details> <summary> Here is what it looks like:</summary>   </details> --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
maryam-saeidi
added a commit
to maryam-saeidi/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2025
Closes elastic#220815 ## Summary This PR adds telemetry for _ignored fields. The goal is to have an alert based on this field and get notified in case a user hits the mapping limit, but by default, we don't expect this to happen. This PR adds `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` field that counts the number of _ignored fields per rule type. In the future, we can extend the telemetry data to also include the actual number of mappings over the limit (there is a [feature request](elastic/elasticsearch#68947) for adding field count information to index API) ### How to test - Add a lot of dynamic fields as mentioned here: elastic#216719 - Create a rule with a custom threshold rule with multiple group by fields to generate an alert with _ignored field - Run the following API and check the value of `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` ``` POST kbn:/internal/telemetry/clusters/_stats?apiVersion=2 { "unencrypted": true, "refreshCache": true } ``` <details> <summary> Here is what it looks like:</summary>   </details> --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com> (cherry picked from commit cde7a86) # Conflicts: # x-pack/platform/plugins/shared/alerting/server/usage/lib/get_telemetry_from_alerts.test.ts
maryam-saeidi
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 3, 2025
#222150) # Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `8.19`: - [[Alerting] Add snapshot telemetry for _ignored fields (#221480)](#221480) <!--- Backport version: 9.6.6 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sorenlouv/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Maryam Saeidi","email":"maryam.saeidi@elastic.co"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2025-05-28T16:02:33Z","message":"[Alerting] Add snapshot telemetry for _ignored fields (#221480)\n\nCloses https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/220815\n\n## Summary\n\nThis PR adds telemetry for _ignored fields. The goal is to have an alert\nbased on this field and get notified in case a user hits the mapping\nlimit, but by default, we don't expect this to happen.\n\nThis PR adds `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` field that counts the\nnumber of _ignored fields per rule type.\n\nIn the future, we can extend the telemetry data to also include the\nactual number of mappings over the limit (there is a [feature\nrequest](elastic/elasticsearch#68947) for\nadding field count information to index API)\n\n### How to test\n\n- Add a lot of dynamic fields as mentioned here:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n- Create a rule with a custom threshold rule with multiple group by\nfields to generate an alert with _ignored field\n- Run the following API and check the value of\n`count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type`\n ```\n POST kbn:/internal/telemetry/clusters/_stats?apiVersion=2\n {\n \"unencrypted\": true,\n \"refreshCache\": true\n }\n ```\n\n<details>\n<summary> Here is what it looks like:</summary>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n</details>\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"cde7a86287956467fffe4346a14a7fd24b99ff93","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.1.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:skip","backport missing","backport:version","v9.1.0","v8.19.0","author:obs-ux-management"],"title":"[Alerting] Add snapshot telemetry for _ignored fields","number":221480,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/221480","mergeCommit":{"message":"[Alerting] Add snapshot telemetry for _ignored fields (#221480)\n\nCloses https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/220815\n\n## Summary\n\nThis PR adds telemetry for _ignored fields. The goal is to have an alert\nbased on this field and get notified in case a user hits the mapping\nlimit, but by default, we don't expect this to happen.\n\nThis PR adds `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` field that counts the\nnumber of _ignored fields per rule type.\n\nIn the future, we can extend the telemetry data to also include the\nactual number of mappings over the limit (there is a [feature\nrequest](elastic/elasticsearch#68947) for\nadding field count information to index API)\n\n### How to test\n\n- Add a lot of dynamic fields as mentioned here:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n- Create a rule with a custom threshold rule with multiple group by\nfields to generate an alert with _ignored field\n- Run the following API and check the value of\n`count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type`\n ```\n POST kbn:/internal/telemetry/clusters/_stats?apiVersion=2\n {\n \"unencrypted\": true,\n \"refreshCache\": true\n }\n ```\n\n<details>\n<summary> Here is what it looks like:</summary>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n</details>\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"cde7a86287956467fffe4346a14a7fd24b99ff93"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["8.19"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"main","label":"v9.1.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.1.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/221480","number":221480,"mergeCommit":{"message":"[Alerting] Add snapshot telemetry for _ignored fields (#221480)\n\nCloses https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/220815\n\n## Summary\n\nThis PR adds telemetry for _ignored fields. The goal is to have an alert\nbased on this field and get notified in case a user hits the mapping\nlimit, but by default, we don't expect this to happen.\n\nThis PR adds `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` field that counts the\nnumber of _ignored fields per rule type.\n\nIn the future, we can extend the telemetry data to also include the\nactual number of mappings over the limit (there is a [feature\nrequest](elastic/elasticsearch#68947) for\nadding field count information to index API)\n\n### How to test\n\n- Add a lot of dynamic fields as mentioned here:\nhttps://github.com//pull/216719\n- Create a rule with a custom threshold rule with multiple group by\nfields to generate an alert with _ignored field\n- Run the following API and check the value of\n`count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type`\n ```\n POST kbn:/internal/telemetry/clusters/_stats?apiVersion=2\n {\n \"unencrypted\": true,\n \"refreshCache\": true\n }\n ```\n\n<details>\n<summary> Here is what it looks like:</summary>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n</details>\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"cde7a86287956467fffe4346a14a7fd24b99ff93"}},{"branch":"8.19","label":"v8.19.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}] BACKPORT-->
qn895
pushed a commit
to qn895/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 3, 2025
This PR fixes the bug introduced with: elastic#216719 We didn't pass the dynamic_templates param while creating the component template. The fields were still being added because the fields were marked as `dynamic: true` As the dynamic_template was ignored, the fields were added with an extra mapping like `filedname.keyword` This PR fixes that too. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
zacharyparikh
pushed a commit
to zacharyparikh/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 4, 2025
Closes elastic#220815 ## Summary This PR adds telemetry for _ignored fields. The goal is to have an alert based on this field and get notified in case a user hits the mapping limit, but by default, we don't expect this to happen. This PR adds `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` field that counts the number of _ignored fields per rule type. In the future, we can extend the telemetry data to also include the actual number of mappings over the limit (there is a [feature request](elastic/elasticsearch#68947) for adding field count information to index API) ### How to test - Add a lot of dynamic fields as mentioned here: elastic#216719 - Create a rule with a custom threshold rule with multiple group by fields to generate an alert with _ignored field - Run the following API and check the value of `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` ``` POST kbn:/internal/telemetry/clusters/_stats?apiVersion=2 { "unencrypted": true, "refreshCache": true } ``` <details> <summary> Here is what it looks like:</summary>   </details> --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
nickpeihl
pushed a commit
to nickpeihl/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 12, 2025
Closes elastic#220815 ## Summary This PR adds telemetry for _ignored fields. The goal is to have an alert based on this field and get notified in case a user hits the mapping limit, but by default, we don't expect this to happen. This PR adds `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` field that counts the number of _ignored fields per rule type. In the future, we can extend the telemetry data to also include the actual number of mappings over the limit (there is a [feature request](elastic/elasticsearch#68947) for adding field count information to index API) ### How to test - Add a lot of dynamic fields as mentioned here: elastic#216719 - Create a rule with a custom threshold rule with multiple group by fields to generate an alert with _ignored field - Run the following API and check the value of `count_ignored_fields_by_rule_type` ``` POST kbn:/internal/telemetry/clusters/_stats?apiVersion=2 { "unencrypted": true, "refreshCache": true } ``` <details> <summary> Here is what it looks like:</summary>   </details> --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 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.
This PR adds the auto-increase the fields limit on startup when an alerts index reaches its limits because of the dynamic fields.
To verify:
To be able to test this PR we need a rule type that adds dynamic fields.
I used the custom threshold rule for this:
Go to the custom threshold rule type definition and change its alerts.mappings to:
Above changes adds 412 dummy fields to the alerts index to make it close to reach its fields limit (default: 2500).
And makes everything under
kibana.alert.groupingpath to be added to the index as dynamic fields.Then apply the below changes to the custom threshold rule executor:
Above changes add the selected groups under
kibana.alerting.groupingpath.Then:
path.data=../your-local-data-pathto keep the data for the next start.Stack Management>Index Managementand search for observability threshold index..internal.alerts-observability.threshold.alerts-default-000001index.The other groups you have selected should be saved under
_ignoredfield:Stack Management>Index ManagementStack Management>Index Management>.internal.alerts-observability.threshold.alerts-default-000001> settings tab."mapping" > "total_fields" > "limit"should be greater than 2500