-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.3k
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
Add multi field info to the IndexPattern #33681
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
d886043
Add multi info to the _fields_for_x API end points
Bargs 264a753
Add multi info to the IndexPattern object
Bargs a52b58c
Add multi info to the Field interface
Bargs 324e0f7
Check for undefined
Bargs 2222f91
Include forgotten test suite and updates its tests with the multi info
Bargs 3ab3185
Update fields with multi info where necessary
Bargs bd7376c
Update fixtures with multi field info
Bargs 9cbd07e
Update es archiver fixtures with multi info
Bargs e50ecc1
update field_caps_response test
Bargs File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion
2
src/legacy/server/sample_data/data_sets/ecommerce/saved_objects.js
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not just have a
isMulti
boolean instead of adding another string propertysubType
? What else couldsubType
be?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we even need the
multi
designation? Can we just assume ifparent
is not undefined, it's multi?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the future it could be
nested
,object
, orjoin
. I see this being used to describe any parent/child relationship between fields. I thought about just doing anisMulti
flag but then we'd need to addisNested
,isObject
andisJoin
in the future.Instead of having a separate parent field and a flag we could also just have something like
multiParent
,nestedParent
,objectParent
,joinParent
. We'd still have to add a new one for each new relationship type, but then they're not coupled together.I dunno, what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've made all the updates I can without making a decision on this. Once we've agreed on a format I'll go through and update all the other places mentioned that need these properties.