Fields disappear after refreshing on visualization pages


Kibana version: 4.5.4
Running on

We created a few visualizations based on certain fields. However, after refreshing the page, it reports the following

There is a problem with that saved object
A field associated with this object no longer exists in the index pattern.
If you know what this error means, go ahead and fix it - otherwise click the delete button above.

So I went to settings and refreshed the field lists, those fields came back. But whenever I refreshed the visualization pages, it will report those bugs and the fields are not indexed anymore.

Any idea on how to tackle this or is it a bug?

Thanks in advance

(Matt Bargar) #2

Is there some sort of external process that may be wiping out your index pattern? Nothing in Kibana should modify the field list, besides clicking that refresh button.


I don't think there is any external process that wiped out my index pattern. Initially I thought it's because I didn't parse my log correctly so I changed my logstash configuration (mutate, kv filter), but still no luck :frowning:

Then I bumped into this similar issue on Github,

They didn't really provide a detailed solution as my fields were like those that come and goes.

(Matt Bargar) #4

Hmmm, are you using a date pattern based index pattern (like [logstash-]YYYY.MM.DD) or are you using one with a wildcard (like logstash-*)? I believe the problem in the issue you linked to should only affect the former.


I think I'm using the one with a wildcard.

Any insights on how to approach this problem?


(Matt Bargar) #6

If you refresh the field list and then refresh the page (without leaving the index pattern management page) do the fields still show up in the list? I just want to make sure the field list is actually getting persisted in elasticsearch.

If the field list is getting persisted, you could set the elasticsearch slow log threshold to 0 and try to see at what point the the index pattern document is getting modified in .kibana. The ID of the document should be the same as the index pattern name.

It's also always worth asking, are you using a proxy or load balancer that could be returning cached results or switching between clusters?


After I refresh the page (without leaving the index pattern management page), those newly added fields all disappear. So it's not getting persisted.


and No, we didn't use any proxy or load balancer.

It's just standard ELK stack

filebat -> logstash -> elasticsearch

(Matt Bargar) #9

Ah interesting. If you open your browser's dev tools before refreshing the field list, do you see any errors in the console or any failed requests in the network tab?


Good catch! There is a 404 error

error: {
root_cause: [
type: "index_not_found_exception",
reason: "no such index",
resource.type: "index_or_alias", "logstash-*",
index: "logstash-*"
type: "index_not_found_exception",
reason: "no such index",
resource.type: "index_or_alias", "logstash-*",
index: "logstash-*"
status: 404

Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 (Not Found)

This is the error message


I think I also forgot to mention our Elasticsearch version: v2.3.5

This might have to do with the fields disappearing. We just upgraded to the latest version and wanted to test it out if the issue still exists

(Matt Bargar) #12

That shouldn't be a problem, ES 2.3.5 and Kibana 4.5.4 are compatible.

It's odd that the field list is ever populated in the first place if you're getting a 404 there. You should see 2 - 3 requests in the network tab of your dev tools when you click the refresh fields button. Could you share the full request/response info? Or if there's no sensitive info that you need to omit, you could just capture a HAR.


After clicking on refresh field list button, I also got an 413 error (Request Entity too large). I think it's also worth mentioning that I got around 3900 fields after the refresh. That doesn't look normal.

(Matt Bargar) #14

It looks like you're hitting Kibana and/or Elasticsearch's max payload size. These are configurable via Kibana's maxPayloadBytes and Elasticsearch's http.max_content_length.

But it sounds like you're saying this large number of fields is unexpected? I notice your index pattern is just *. Are you casting too wide of a net and including indices that you don't intend to perhaps? If you look at the response to the GET request for <kibana-url>/elasticsearch/*/_mapping/field/* (before the one that fails) you can see all of the fields from all of the indices that are getting pulled back.


Thanks for pointing that out.

Should I put > as our kibana url since we are hosting it on Sorry about this dumb question since I am not really familiar with ELK.

(Matt Bargar) #16

The full url would look like this:*/_mapping/field/*?ignore_unavailable=false&allow_no_indices=false&include_defaults=true

Though you should also be able to see it in your browser dev tools when refreshing the field list.


Thanks. Looks like I got a huge response back. How can I limit the number of fields/get rid of some of the fields? Just to avoid the 1000 limit

(Matt Bargar) #18

The only way to reduce the number of fields is to create a more narrow index pattern. The * index pattern is capturing every index that exists in Elasticsearch. If you just wanted to look at logstash data for instance, you could create a pattern like logstash-*. Just * likely includes things you don't want to see, like kibana's own internal index .kibana.


For some reasons all of our logs that is parsed through logstash will only show up if I change the index pattern to *-*, if I change the index pattern to logstash-*, our logs is not showing up in the kibana and therefore I wouldn't be able to pick up the fields. Is there any settings that I need to do to make sure the logs go to *-*? I tried to set it as default index pattern and still no luck

Also, I think we also have a lot of garbage fields in *-*, and that's why it gets to 4000 fields and exploding.

(Matt Bargar) #20

I would investigate your logstash config to see what indices it's using. It sounds to me like the best way to fix this is by doing some data clean up and ensuring that future data gets indexed into consistently named indices.