Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT#252579
Merged
Apmats merged 5 commits intoelastic:mainfrom Feb 16, 2026
Merged
Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT#252579Apmats merged 5 commits intoelastic:mainfrom
Apmats merged 5 commits intoelastic:mainfrom
Conversation
Contributor
💚 Build Succeeded
Metrics [docs]
History
|
Contributor
|
Starting backport for target branches: 9.2, 9.3 https://github.com/elastic/kibana/actions/runs/22064817371 |
kibanamachine
added a commit
to kibanamachine/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2026
…astic#252579) ## Summary Fixes elastic#251491 Elasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields (`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`, `modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses ([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](elastic/elasticsearch#130847)). These fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to reject it with: ``` parse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis ``` The enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches existing parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT requests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this inadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both operations. This PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT call in both affected code paths: - `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in `create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching) - `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (detaching) Similar fix was applied in Fleet: elastic#241096 ### Checklist Check the PR satisfies following conditions. Reviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well. - [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing guidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses sentence case text and includes [i18n support](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md) - [x] [Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html) was added for features that require explanation or tutorials - [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios - [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be allowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker list](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker) - [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking changes have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The `release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations. - [x] [Flaky Test Runner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was used on any tests changed - [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the [guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process) - [x] Review the [backport guidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing) and apply applicable `backport:*` labels. ### Identify risks Does this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard to test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss. Describe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified risk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging. - [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request payload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES versions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before then). Unit tests cover both affected code paths. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com> (cherry picked from commit 2da0bcb)
kibanamachine
added a commit
to kibanamachine/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2026
…astic#252579) ## Summary Fixes elastic#251491 Elasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields (`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`, `modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses ([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](elastic/elasticsearch#130847)). These fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to reject it with: ``` parse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis ``` The enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches existing parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT requests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this inadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both operations. This PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT call in both affected code paths: - `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in `create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching) - `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (detaching) Similar fix was applied in Fleet: elastic#241096 ### Checklist Check the PR satisfies following conditions. Reviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well. - [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing guidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses sentence case text and includes [i18n support](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md) - [x] [Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html) was added for features that require explanation or tutorials - [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios - [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be allowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker list](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker) - [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking changes have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The `release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations. - [x] [Flaky Test Runner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was used on any tests changed - [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the [guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process) - [x] Review the [backport guidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing) and apply applicable `backport:*` labels. ### Identify risks Does this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard to test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss. Describe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified risk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging. - [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request payload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES versions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before then). Unit tests cover both affected code paths. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com> (cherry picked from commit 2da0bcb)
Contributor
💚 All backports created successfully
Note: Successful backport PRs will be merged automatically after passing CI. Questions ?Please refer to the Backport tool documentation |
kibanamachine
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2026
…UT (#252579) (#253257) # Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `9.3`: - [Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT (#252579)](#252579) <!--- Backport version: 9.6.6 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sorenlouv/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Apostolos Matsagkas","email":"Apmats@users.noreply.github.com"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2026-02-16T12:45:15Z","message":"Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT (#252579)\n\n## Summary\n\nFixes #251491\n\nElasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields\n(`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`,\n`modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses\n([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/130847)).\nThese fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to\nreject it with:\n\n```\nparse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis\n```\n\nThe enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches\nexisting parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT\nrequests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this\ninadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both\noperations.\n\nThis PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT\ncall in both affected code paths:\n\n- `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in\n`create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching)\n- `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts`\n(detaching)\n\nSimilar fix was applied in Fleet: #241096\n\n### Checklist\n\nCheck the PR satisfies following conditions. \n\nReviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.\n\n- [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing\nguidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses\nsentence case text and includes [i18n\nsupport](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md)\n- [x]\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\nwas added for features that require explanation or tutorials\n- [x] [Unit or functional\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\nwere updated or added to match the most common scenarios\n- [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be\nallowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker\nlist](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker)\n- [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking\nchanges have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The\n`release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations.\n- [x] [Flaky Test\nRunner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was\nused on any tests changed\n- [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section,\nand the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the\n[guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process)\n- [x] Review the [backport\nguidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing)\nand apply applicable `backport:*` labels.\n\n### Identify risks\n\nDoes this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard\nto test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss.\n\nDescribe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified\nrisk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging.\n\n- [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request\npayload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES\nversions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before\nthen). Unit tests cover both affected code paths.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"2da0bcbf25c88f337dace1a69e3aad194dd85774","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.4.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:fix","backport:version","v9.4.0","backport:9.2","9.4 candidate","backport:9.3","v9.3.1","v9.2.6"],"title":"Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT","number":252579,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/252579","mergeCommit":{"message":"Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT (#252579)\n\n## Summary\n\nFixes #251491\n\nElasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields\n(`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`,\n`modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses\n([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/130847)).\nThese fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to\nreject it with:\n\n```\nparse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis\n```\n\nThe enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches\nexisting parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT\nrequests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this\ninadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both\noperations.\n\nThis PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT\ncall in both affected code paths:\n\n- `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in\n`create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching)\n- `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts`\n(detaching)\n\nSimilar fix was applied in Fleet: #241096\n\n### Checklist\n\nCheck the PR satisfies following conditions. \n\nReviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.\n\n- [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing\nguidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses\nsentence case text and includes [i18n\nsupport](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md)\n- [x]\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\nwas added for features that require explanation or tutorials\n- [x] [Unit or functional\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\nwere updated or added to match the most common scenarios\n- [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be\nallowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker\nlist](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker)\n- [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking\nchanges have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The\n`release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations.\n- [x] [Flaky Test\nRunner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was\nused on any tests changed\n- [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section,\nand the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the\n[guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process)\n- [x] Review the [backport\nguidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing)\nand apply applicable `backport:*` labels.\n\n### Identify risks\n\nDoes this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard\nto test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss.\n\nDescribe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified\nrisk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging.\n\n- [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request\npayload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES\nversions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before\nthen). Unit tests cover both affected code paths.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"2da0bcbf25c88f337dace1a69e3aad194dd85774"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["9.3","9.2"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"main","label":"v9.4.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.4.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/252579","number":252579,"mergeCommit":{"message":"Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT (#252579)\n\n## Summary\n\nFixes #251491\n\nElasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields\n(`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`,\n`modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses\n([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/130847)).\nThese fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to\nreject it with:\n\n```\nparse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis\n```\n\nThe enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches\nexisting parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT\nrequests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this\ninadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both\noperations.\n\nThis PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT\ncall in both affected code paths:\n\n- `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in\n`create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching)\n- `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts`\n(detaching)\n\nSimilar fix was applied in Fleet: #241096\n\n### Checklist\n\nCheck the PR satisfies following conditions. \n\nReviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.\n\n- [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing\nguidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses\nsentence case text and includes [i18n\nsupport](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md)\n- [x]\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\nwas added for features that require explanation or tutorials\n- [x] [Unit or functional\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\nwere updated or added to match the most common scenarios\n- [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be\nallowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker\nlist](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker)\n- [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking\nchanges have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The\n`release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations.\n- [x] [Flaky Test\nRunner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was\nused on any tests changed\n- [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section,\nand the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the\n[guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process)\n- [x] Review the [backport\nguidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing)\nand apply applicable `backport:*` labels.\n\n### Identify risks\n\nDoes this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard\nto test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss.\n\nDescribe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified\nrisk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging.\n\n- [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request\npayload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES\nversions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before\nthen). Unit tests cover both affected code paths.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"2da0bcbf25c88f337dace1a69e3aad194dd85774"}},{"branch":"9.3","label":"v9.3.1","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"},{"branch":"9.2","label":"v9.2.6","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}] BACKPORT--> Co-authored-by: Apostolos Matsagkas <Apmats@users.noreply.github.com>
kibanamachine
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2026
…UT (#252579) (#253256) # Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `9.2`: - [Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT (#252579)](#252579) <!--- Backport version: 9.6.6 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sorenlouv/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Apostolos Matsagkas","email":"Apmats@users.noreply.github.com"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2026-02-16T12:45:15Z","message":"Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT (#252579)\n\n## Summary\n\nFixes #251491\n\nElasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields\n(`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`,\n`modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses\n([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/130847)).\nThese fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to\nreject it with:\n\n```\nparse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis\n```\n\nThe enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches\nexisting parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT\nrequests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this\ninadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both\noperations.\n\nThis PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT\ncall in both affected code paths:\n\n- `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in\n`create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching)\n- `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts`\n(detaching)\n\nSimilar fix was applied in Fleet: #241096\n\n### Checklist\n\nCheck the PR satisfies following conditions. \n\nReviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.\n\n- [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing\nguidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses\nsentence case text and includes [i18n\nsupport](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md)\n- [x]\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\nwas added for features that require explanation or tutorials\n- [x] [Unit or functional\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\nwere updated or added to match the most common scenarios\n- [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be\nallowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker\nlist](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker)\n- [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking\nchanges have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The\n`release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations.\n- [x] [Flaky Test\nRunner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was\nused on any tests changed\n- [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section,\nand the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the\n[guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process)\n- [x] Review the [backport\nguidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing)\nand apply applicable `backport:*` labels.\n\n### Identify risks\n\nDoes this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard\nto test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss.\n\nDescribe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified\nrisk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging.\n\n- [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request\npayload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES\nversions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before\nthen). Unit tests cover both affected code paths.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"2da0bcbf25c88f337dace1a69e3aad194dd85774","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.4.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:fix","backport:version","v9.4.0","backport:9.2","9.4 candidate","backport:9.3","v9.3.1","v9.2.6"],"title":"Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT","number":252579,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/252579","mergeCommit":{"message":"Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT (#252579)\n\n## Summary\n\nFixes #251491\n\nElasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields\n(`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`,\n`modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses\n([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/130847)).\nThese fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to\nreject it with:\n\n```\nparse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis\n```\n\nThe enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches\nexisting parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT\nrequests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this\ninadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both\noperations.\n\nThis PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT\ncall in both affected code paths:\n\n- `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in\n`create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching)\n- `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts`\n(detaching)\n\nSimilar fix was applied in Fleet: #241096\n\n### Checklist\n\nCheck the PR satisfies following conditions. \n\nReviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.\n\n- [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing\nguidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses\nsentence case text and includes [i18n\nsupport](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md)\n- [x]\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\nwas added for features that require explanation or tutorials\n- [x] [Unit or functional\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\nwere updated or added to match the most common scenarios\n- [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be\nallowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker\nlist](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker)\n- [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking\nchanges have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The\n`release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations.\n- [x] [Flaky Test\nRunner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was\nused on any tests changed\n- [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section,\nand the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the\n[guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process)\n- [x] Review the [backport\nguidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing)\nand apply applicable `backport:*` labels.\n\n### Identify risks\n\nDoes this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard\nto test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss.\n\nDescribe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified\nrisk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging.\n\n- [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request\npayload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES\nversions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before\nthen). Unit tests cover both affected code paths.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"2da0bcbf25c88f337dace1a69e3aad194dd85774"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["9.3","9.2"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"main","label":"v9.4.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.4.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/252579","number":252579,"mergeCommit":{"message":"Strip system-managed date fields from ingest pipelines before PUT (#252579)\n\n## Summary\n\nFixes #251491\n\nElasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields\n(`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`,\n`modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses\n([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/pull/130847)).\nThese fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to\nreject it with:\n\n```\nparse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis\n```\n\nThe enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches\nexisting parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT\nrequests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this\ninadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both\noperations.\n\nThis PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT\ncall in both affected code paths:\n\n- `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in\n`create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching)\n- `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts`\n(detaching)\n\nSimilar fix was applied in Fleet: #241096\n\n### Checklist\n\nCheck the PR satisfies following conditions. \n\nReviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.\n\n- [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing\nguidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses\nsentence case text and includes [i18n\nsupport](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md)\n- [x]\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\nwas added for features that require explanation or tutorials\n- [x] [Unit or functional\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\nwere updated or added to match the most common scenarios\n- [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be\nallowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker\nlist](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker)\n- [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking\nchanges have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The\n`release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations.\n- [x] [Flaky Test\nRunner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was\nused on any tests changed\n- [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section,\nand the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the\n[guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process)\n- [x] Review the [backport\nguidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing)\nand apply applicable `backport:*` labels.\n\n### Identify risks\n\nDoes this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard\nto test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss.\n\nDescribe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified\nrisk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging.\n\n- [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request\npayload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES\nversions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before\nthen). Unit tests cover both affected code paths.\n\n---------\n\nCo-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>","sha":"2da0bcbf25c88f337dace1a69e3aad194dd85774"}},{"branch":"9.3","label":"v9.3.1","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"},{"branch":"9.2","label":"v9.2.6","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}] BACKPORT--> Co-authored-by: Apostolos Matsagkas <Apmats@users.noreply.github.com>
paulinashakirova
pushed a commit
to paulinashakirova/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 17, 2026
…astic#252579) ## Summary Fixes elastic#251491 Elasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields (`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`, `modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses ([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](elastic/elasticsearch#130847)). These fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to reject it with: ``` parse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis ``` The enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches existing parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT requests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this inadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both operations. This PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT call in both affected code paths: - `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in `create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching) - `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (detaching) Similar fix was applied in Fleet: elastic#241096 ### Checklist Check the PR satisfies following conditions. Reviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well. - [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing guidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses sentence case text and includes [i18n support](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md) - [x] [Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html) was added for features that require explanation or tutorials - [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios - [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be allowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker list](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker) - [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking changes have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The `release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations. - [x] [Flaky Test Runner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was used on any tests changed - [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the [guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process) - [x] Review the [backport guidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing) and apply applicable `backport:*` labels. ### Identify risks Does this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard to test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss. Describe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified risk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging. - [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request payload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES versions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before then). Unit tests cover both affected code paths. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
patrykkopycinski
pushed a commit
to patrykkopycinski/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 19, 2026
…astic#252579) ## Summary Fixes elastic#251491 Elasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields (`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`, `modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses ([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](elastic/elasticsearch#130847)). These fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to reject it with: ``` parse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis ``` The enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches existing parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT requests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this inadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both operations. This PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT call in both affected code paths: - `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in `create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching) - `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (detaching) Similar fix was applied in Fleet: elastic#241096 ### Checklist Check the PR satisfies following conditions. Reviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well. - [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing guidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses sentence case text and includes [i18n support](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md) - [x] [Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html) was added for features that require explanation or tutorials - [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios - [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be allowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker list](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker) - [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking changes have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The `release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations. - [x] [Flaky Test Runner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was used on any tests changed - [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the [guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process) - [x] Review the [backport guidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing) and apply applicable `backport:*` labels. ### Identify risks Does this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard to test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss. Describe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified risk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging. - [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request payload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES versions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before then). Unit tests cover both affected code paths. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
ersin-erdal
pushed a commit
to ersin-erdal/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 19, 2026
…astic#252579) ## Summary Fixes elastic#251491 Elasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields (`created_date`, `created_date_millis`, `modified_date`, `modified_date_millis`) in ingest pipeline GET responses ([elastic/elasticsearch#130847](elastic/elasticsearch#130847)). These fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to reject it with: ``` parse_exception: Provided a pipeline property which is managed by the system: created_date_millis ``` The enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches existing parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT requests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this inadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both operations. This PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT call in both affected code paths: - `addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipeline` in `create_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (attaching) - `detachMlInferencePipeline` in `detach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts` (detaching) Similar fix was applied in Fleet: elastic#241096 ### Checklist Check the PR satisfies following conditions. Reviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well. - [x] Any text added follows [EUI's writing guidelines](https://elastic.github.io/eui/#/guidelines/writing), uses sentence case text and includes [i18n support](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-i18n/README.md) - [x] [Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html) was added for features that require explanation or tutorials - [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios - [ ] If a plugin configuration key changed, check if it needs to be allowlisted in the cloud and added to the [docker list](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/main/src/dev/build/tasks/os_packages/docker_generator/resources/base/bin/kibana-docker) - [x] This was checked for breaking HTTP API changes, and any breaking changes have been approved by the breaking-change committee. The `release_note:breaking` label should be applied in these situations. - [x] [Flaky Test Runner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was used on any tests changed - [ ] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the [guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process) - [x] Review the [backport guidelines](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VyN5k91e5OVumlc0Gb9RPa3h1ewuPE705nRtioPiTvY/edit?usp=sharing) and apply applicable `backport:*` labels. ### Identify risks Does this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard to test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss. Describe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified risk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging. - [x] **Low risk** — The change only removes fields from the PUT request payload that ES already rejects. No functional behavior changes for ES versions prior to 9.2 (fields were not present in GET responses before then). Unit tests cover both affected code paths. --------- 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
4 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.
Summary
Fixes #251491
Elasticsearch 9.2 introduced system-managed timestamp fields (
created_date,created_date_millis,modified_date,modified_date_millis) in ingest pipeline GET responses (elastic/elasticsearch#130847). These fields are read-only, including them in a PUT request causes ES to reject it with:The enterprise search plugin's ML inference pipeline management fetches existing parent pipelines and spreads all their fields back into PUT requests when attaching or detaching sub-pipelines. Since 9.2, this inadvertently includes the new system-managed fields, breaking both operations.
This PR strips those managed fields via destructuring before the PUT call in both affected code paths:
addSubPipelineToIndexSpecificMlPipelineincreate_ml_inference_pipeline.ts(attaching)detachMlInferencePipelineindetach_ml_inference_pipeline.ts(detaching)Similar fix was applied in Fleet: #241096
Checklist
Check the PR satisfies following conditions.
Reviewers should verify this PR satisfies this list as well.
release_note:breakinglabel should be applied in these situations.release_note:*label is applied per the guidelinesbackport:*labels.Identify risks
Does this PR introduce any risks? For example, consider risks like hard to test bugs, performance regression, potential of data loss.
Describe the risk, its severity, and mitigation for each identified risk. Invite stakeholders and evaluate how to proceed before merging.