Enable ResolverStyle.STRICT for java formatters #46675
Merged
Conversation
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
|
Pinging @elastic/es-core-infra |
|
@elasticmachine update branch |
|
Ok to test |
|
@elasticmachine update branch |
rjernst
reviewed
Sep 24, 2019
|
|
||
| JavaDateMathParser(String format, JavaDateFormatter formatter, DateTimeFormatter roundUpFormatter) { | ||
| JavaDateMathParser(String format, JavaDateFormatter formatter, JavaDateFormatter roundupParser2) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the old name was better?
|
@elasticmachine run elasticsearch-ci/bwc |
@rjernst I am fully supportive of this. I wonder if this should not be in a separate PR thought. there is >2000 usages of |
|
Sure, a separate PR (or multiple) is fine. |
pgomulka
added a commit
to pgomulka/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 11, 2019
Joda was using ResolverStyle.STRICT when parsing. This means that date will be validated to be a correct year, year-of-month, day-of-month However, we also want to make it works with Year-Of-Era as Joda used to, hence custom temporalquery.localdate in DateFormatters.from Within DateFormatters we use the correct uuuu year instead of yyyy year of era worth noting: if yyyy(without an era) is used in code, the parsing result will be a TemporalAccessor which will fail to be converted into LocalDate. We mostly use DateFormatters.from so this takes care of this. If possible the uuuu format should be used.
pgomulka
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 11, 2019
#47913) Joda was using ResolverStyle.STRICT when parsing. This means that date will be validated to be a correct year, year-of-month, day-of-month However, we also want to make it works with Year-Of-Era as Joda used to, hence custom temporalquery.localdate in DateFormatters.from Within DateFormatters we use the correct uuuu year instead of yyyy year of era worth noting: if yyyy(without an era) is used in code, the parsing result will be a TemporalAccessor which will fail to be converted into LocalDate. We mostly use DateFormatters.from so this takes care of this. If possible the uuuu format should be used.
howardhuanghua
pushed a commit
to TencentCloudES/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 14, 2019
Joda was using ResolverStyle.STRICT when parsing. This means that date will be validated to be a correct year, year-of-month, day-of-month However, we also want to make it works with Year-Of-Era as Joda used to, hence custom temporalquery.localdate in DateFormatters.from Within DateFormatters we use the correct uuuu year instead of yyyy year of era worth noting: if yyyy(without an era) is used in code, the parsing result will be a TemporalAccessor which will fail to be converted into LocalDate. We mostly use DateFormatters.from so this takes care of this. If possible the uuuu format should be used.
cbuescher
pushed a commit
to cbuescher/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 11, 2019
A recent change (elastic#46675) introduced stricter date parsing. We should now also catch DateTimeExceptions in DateFieldMapper and ignore those when the `ignore_malformed` option is set. Also adding an additional test that would have caught this. Closes elastic#50081
SivagurunathanV
pushed a commit
to SivagurunathanV/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 23, 2020
A recent change around date parsing (elastic#46675) made it stricter, so we should now also catch DateTimeExceptions in DateFieldMapper and ignore those when the `ignore_malformed` option is set. Closes elastic#50081
This was referenced Feb 3, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Joda was using ResolverStyle.STRICT when parsing. This means that date will be validated to be a correct year, year-of-month, day-of-month
However, we also want to make it works with Year-Of-Era as Joda used to, hence custom temporalquery.localdate in
DateFormatters.fromWithin
DateFormatterswe use the correctuuuuyear instead ofyyyyyear of eraworth noting: if
yyyy(without an era) is used in code, the parsing result will be aTemporalAccessorwhich will fail to be converted into LocalDate. We mostly useDateFormatters.fromso this takes care of this. If possible theuuuuformat should be used.