# Creating new types in 6.0
**URL:** https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350
**Category:** Elasticsearch
**Created:** [December 12, 2017, 1:57pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350 "2017-12-12T13:57:51Z")
**Posts on this page:** 7
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@percona.jayj](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/percona.jayj)
#### Post date: [December 12, 2017, 1:57pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350/1 "2017-12-12T13:57:51Z")
I can appreciate the decision to remove mapping types going forward in ES, I can also appreciate that version 6 has support for existing indexes with types, but we have until version 7 to totally remove the types.
As I understand it, I can force version 6 behavior in 5.6 with index.mapping.single\_type: true, BUT I cannot do the opposite -- have version 6 allow multiple types with index.mapping.single\_type: false.
My reality is I am stuck on 5.6 with multiple types and I don't feel I can risk running 6 without the ability to re-create/re-load existing typed indexes if I need to. Is there any way to do this in 6?
---
### Author:  [@dadoonet](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/dadoonet)
#### Post date: [December 12, 2017, 3:30pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350/2 "2017-12-12T15:30:27Z")
You can update to 6.0 even if your existing indices have multiple types. But you can’t create a new index in 6.0 with multiple types.
---
### Author:  [@percona.jayj](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/percona.jayj)
#### Post date: [December 12, 2017, 4:15pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350/3 "2017-12-12T16:15:40Z")
That confirms what I already knew. My dilemma is that the maintenance of the various systems I have using ES sometimes requires a re-index or otherwise dump/reload type rebuild of an index. This could be due to the need to patch in some new requirement, or tweak a mapping definition. This generally means needing to create a new index.
I have a big backlog of development effort to update these systems to be typeless, so if I go to 6, I'm essentially handcuffing my ability to maintain my existing systems, and that is unfortunately not an acceptable risk.
I personally feel you guys made a mistake in totally and absolutely preventing new indexes in 6 without types.
---
### Author:  [@dadoonet](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/dadoonet)
#### Post date: [December 12, 2017, 4:39pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350/4 "2017-12-12T16:39:00Z")
> I personally feel you guys made a mistake in totally and absolutely preventing new indexes in 6 without types.
If multiple types is what you want, why not still keep 5.6 then?
And switch later to 6.x only when you are ready.
Because if such a switch was existing in 6.0, you'd probably use it and then complain later when 7.0 is released, no? I don't understand what'd be the difference TBH.
What do you have in mind?
---
### Author:  [@percona.jayj](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/percona.jayj)
#### Post date: [December 12, 2017, 5:57pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350/5 "2017-12-12T17:57:56Z")
I'm sure I should have paid more attention to the 6.0 dev cycle, so I can understand this is on me. That said, I'm here plodding along on 5.x and suddenly the next major release won't support a lot of what I spent the last year building.
For a datastore that people use for a lot of production data I would have expected something like:
5.x - opt-in to new behavior
6.x - opt-out of new behavior
7.x - the new behavior no matter what
True opt-out in 6.x would tell me (with hopefully plenty of time) that how I'm doing things is getting phased out, but does so in a way that doesn't bring my upgrades to a screeching halt.
5.x got opt-in a mere 2 months before 6 got released. 6.x is not opt-out because I cannot reproduce key functionality that I can with 5.x. If I were try to go to ES6 with typed indexes, I'd have to rebuild my testing framework to first create a fresh index on 5.6, do a 6.0 upgrade and then run my tests.
Further, types are more than just a "functionality" change, this is fundamental to the structure of ES from (I think) the beginning. I expect a production worthy datastore to support legacy behavior and phase it out in a more controlled way over a much longer period of time. I guess that's most of what irks me.
I can stay on 5.6 and probably will be forced to for a while. However, this means I'm going to fall even further behind in ES changes. It means I can't use any other new ELK features or fixes (Kibana 5.6 has a bug for me that is fixed in 6, but I have to use 5.5 instead).
---
### Author:  [@dadoonet](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/dadoonet)
#### Post date: [December 12, 2017, 6:16pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350/6 "2017-12-12T18:16:46Z")
In case you need more information about the full plan regarding this topic, it's there.
>
---
### Author:  [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)
#### Post date: [January 9, 2018, 6:16pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/creating-new-types-in-6-0/111350/7 "2018-01-09T18:16:49Z")
This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.