This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 13, 2025. It is now read-only.
ElasticIndexDetails IP field is not an array #2154
Closed
Conversation
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
Contributor
|
This commit would break the ElasticSearch collector for versions below 5.x, where that field is an array. I (by coincidence) submitted PR #2155 which fixes this issue in a way that does not break the collector for older Elastic versions (cc @captncraig) |
Author
|
Such coincidence haha Thank you! I'll close this PR then |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The elasticsearch collector was failing due to:
scollector[13949]: error: interval.go:65: elasticsearch: json: cannot unmarshal string into Go struct field .ip of type []stringOn my elasticsearch 5.x node:
elastic-1:~# curl localhost:9200/_nodes/_local/stats... ,"ip":"172.16.0.19:9300",....So this PR fixes it, although I have a single node cluster, so I dont really know if this response would be different with more nodes