Skip to content
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

Updates 'Getting ready for production' page #113679

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kosabogi
Copy link
Contributor

@kosabogi kosabogi commented Sep 27, 2024

Work In Progress

Overview

This update adds the Getting ready for production section to the Elasticsearch basics chapter.

FYI: This aims to expand and improve upon existing page

Related Issue

112999

Preview

Getting ready for production

@kosabogi kosabogi added Team:Docs Meta label for docs team auto-backport-and-merge Automatically create backport pull requests and merge when ready v8.16.0 v9.0.0 labels Sep 27, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Documentation preview:

@elasticsearchmachine elasticsearchmachine added needs:triage Requires assignment of a team area label external-contributor Pull request authored by a developer outside the Elasticsearch team and removed Team:Docs Meta label for docs team labels Sep 27, 2024
@leemthompo leemthompo added >docs General docs changes Team:Docs Meta label for docs team and removed external-contributor Pull request authored by a developer outside the Elasticsearch team labels Sep 27, 2024
@elasticsearchmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-docs (Team:Docs)

@elasticsearchmachine elasticsearchmachine removed the needs:triage Requires assignment of a team area label label Sep 27, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@shainaraskas shainaraskas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

feels bad to ✅ this myself because I wrote most of it - will let @leemthompo do a review as well.

Provided some typo/grammar feedback and some thoughts on the scope of the page and deletions that we should consider before merging.

This content is pretty sensitive - might want to loop in @/DaveCTurner for a review - Liam, WYT?

docs/reference/intro.asciidoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/reference/intro.asciidoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/reference/intro.asciidoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/reference/intro.asciidoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/reference/intro.asciidoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/reference/intro.asciidoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
testing with your own data and queries].
[TIP]
====
You can also take <<snapshot-restore,snapshots>> of your cluster that can be restored in case of failure.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@leemthompo do you think this mention is enough since we introduced it in the overview as well? Should there be another section for snapshot/restore? leaning toward yes

Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo Sep 27, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@shainaraskas Not sure really if we need more than this here, the page is nice and digestible right now

tagging because this reply is now an orphan because I did it as part of a review 😄

@leemthompo
Copy link
Contributor

might want to loop in @/DaveCTurner for a review - Liam, WYT?

💯 Once we're happy we can open this up next week

Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Once Shaina's comments have been addressed I'm happy to open this up to SME review. I think this work already achieves the goal of expanding and improving the existing page, with zero loss of important information. :)

docs/reference/intro.asciidoc Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/reference/intro.asciidoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
testing with your own data and queries].
[TIP]
====
You can also take <<snapshot-restore,snapshots>> of your cluster that can be restored in case of failure.
Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo Sep 27, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@shainaraskas Not sure really if we need more than this here, the page is nice and digestible right now

tagging because this reply is now an orphan because I did it as part of a review 😄

Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM with one formatting change required (h/t @DaveCTurner)

@kosabogi one follow-up task for this might be to grep for all instances of <<scalability, some Link text>> across the Elasticsearch guide and make sure the link texts make sense now that we've changed the page title.

Comment on lines +398 to +401
==== Use multiple nodes and shards for better performance and resilience
++++
<titleabbrev>Use multiple nodes and shards</titleabbrev>
++++
Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo Sep 30, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
==== Use multiple nodes and shards for better performance and resilience
++++
<titleabbrev>Use multiple nodes and shards</titleabbrev>
++++
==== Use multiple nodes and shards

turns out the abbreviation is messing up the left-hand nav, so we can just shorten the heading itself

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
auto-backport-and-merge Automatically create backport pull requests and merge when ready >docs General docs changes Team:Docs Meta label for docs team v8.15.0 v8.16.0 v9.0.0
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants