Skip to content
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

[FEATURE] Support for composite codec #209

Open
bharath-techie opened this issue Dec 12, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

[FEATURE] Support for composite codec #209

bharath-techie opened this issue Dec 12, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@bharath-techie
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem?

Right now all codecs in custom-codecs repository delegates to PerFieldMappingPostingFormatCodec present in core OpenSearch. But core OpenSearch switches to CompositeCodec if index has mappings associated with composite index .

What solution would you like?

For indices where composite index is present, we should delegate to CompositeCodec instead of PerFieldMappingPostingFormatCodec.
I can think of couple of solutions :

  1. Handle it based on mapperService.isCompositeIndexPresent() in custom-codecs repository
  2. We can get the default delegate codec from core OpenSearch probably via CodecService based on MapperService inputs.
@bharath-techie bharath-techie added enhancement New feature or request untriaged labels Dec 12, 2024
@bharath-techie bharath-techie changed the title [FEATURE] Support for compositeCodec [FEATURE] Support for composite codec Dec 12, 2024
@bharath-techie
Copy link
Author

Hi @reta ,
Any thoughts on this ?

@reta
Copy link
Collaborator

reta commented Dec 19, 2024

Any thoughts on this ?

Sorry @bharath-techie , missed it, I think it would make sense to align the custom codecs registration with OpenSearch core and take composite indices into account, thank you

@reta reta removed the untriaged label Dec 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants