Skip to content

Auto-generated code for main #2262

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 3, 2024
Merged

Auto-generated code for main #2262

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 3, 2024

Conversation

elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

As titled

@elasticmachine elasticmachine force-pushed the generates_main_code branch 4 times, most recently from 493bcd4 to d25c565 Compare May 31, 2024 06:07
@JoshMock JoshMock merged commit e1de2bd into main Jun 3, 2024
15 checks passed
@JoshMock JoshMock deleted the generates_main_code branch June 3, 2024 18:31
@@ -1413,7 +1413,7 @@ export type SearchHighlighterType = 'plain' | 'fvh' | 'unified' | string

export interface SearchHit<TDocument = unknown> {
_index: IndexName
_id: Id
_id?: Id
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How can I figure out why this can be undefined now? I can't seem to notice anything relevant in changelogs.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Type definitions are generated from the specification. In this particular case, it looks like this change happened in elastic/elasticsearch-specification#2592.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you! This clears it up.

 * @es_quirk '_id' is not available when using 'stored_fields: _none_'
 * on a search request. Otherwise the field is always present on hits

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants