From bfbd6167e28cfc0a0617fe149868937566ee0b4b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Istv=C3=A1n=20Zolt=C3=A1n=20Szab=C3=B3?= Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 10:37:58 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] [DOCS] Adds data stream and ILM related limitation items to transforms (#63016) (#63047) --- docs/reference/transform/limitations.asciidoc | 27 ++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/docs/reference/transform/limitations.asciidoc b/docs/reference/transform/limitations.asciidoc index 6c12aea11e6d4..fea844cc216ac 100644 --- a/docs/reference/transform/limitations.asciidoc +++ b/docs/reference/transform/limitations.asciidoc @@ -202,4 +202,29 @@ issue will occur. If your data uses the <>, aggregations are nonetheless on millisecond resolution. This limitation also affects the -aggregations in your {transforms}. \ No newline at end of file +aggregations in your {transforms}. + +[discrete] +[[transform-data-streams-destination]] +== Data streams as destination indices are not supported + +{transforms-cap} update data in the destination index which requires writing +into the destination. <> are designed to be append-only, which +means you cannot send update or delete requests directly to a data stream. For +this reason, data streams are not supported as destination indices for +{transforms}. + + +[discrete] +[[transform-ilm-destination]] +== ILM as destination index may cause duplicated documents + +<> is not recommended to use as a {transform} +destination index. {transforms-cap} update documents in the current destination, +and cannot delete documents in the indices previously used by ILM. This may lead +to duplicated documents when you use {transforms} combined with ILM in case of a +rollover. + +If you use ILM to have time-based indices, please consider using the +<> instead. The processor works without duplicated +documents if your {transform} contains a `group_by` based on `date_histogram`. \ No newline at end of file