Skip to content

Skip DateHistogram aggregations for <7.2.0 #4943

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
Aug 5, 2020
Merged

Conversation

russcam
Copy link
Contributor

@russcam russcam commented Aug 5, 2020

This commit skips running DateHistogram aggregations
for versions <7.2.0 as they use calendar_interval and
fixed_interval, which were introduced in 7.2.0.

This commit skips running DateHistogram aggregations
for versions <7.2.0 as they use calendar_interval and
fixed_interval, which were introduced in 7.2.0.
Copy link
Member

@Mpdreamz Mpdreamz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This was so close to a green CI run! need to double check #4894 made its way on the other integration branches.

@Mpdreamz
Copy link
Member

Mpdreamz commented Aug 5, 2020

#4894 made its way back, we have to update the docs on all the branches though.

@russcam russcam merged commit da617c7 into 7.x Aug 5, 2020
@russcam russcam deleted the integration-tests-7 branch August 5, 2020 08:00
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 5, 2020
This commit skips running DateHistogram aggregations
for versions <7.2.0 as they use calendar_interval and
fixed_interval, which were introduced in 7.2.0.
russcam added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 5, 2020
This commit skips running DateHistogram aggregations
for versions <7.2.0 as they use calendar_interval and
fixed_interval, which were introduced in 7.2.0.

Co-authored-by: Russ Cam <russ.cam@elastic.co>
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.

2 participants