Index.codec in template is not accepting anymore in ES6.5?

[Suryadip_Nag]

We have migrated to Elasticsearch from 5.5 to 6.5. We have field in template index.codec but it is not accepting anymore when I try to create the template in ES6.5. But same template is getting created in ES5.5.

curl -X PUT "localhost:9200/_template/junoslogs" -H 'Content-Type: application/json' -d @template-lc.json
{"error":{"root_cause":[{"type":"parse_exception","reason":"unknown key [index.codec] in the template "}],"type":"parse_exception","reason":"unknown key [index.codec] in the template "},"status":400}

Template snippet is like below:

{
"order": 0,
"template": "jlogs-*",
"index.codec": "best_compression",
"settings": {
"index.refresh_interval": "5s",
"index":{
"number_of_shards" : 2,
"number_of_replicas" : 0,
........

Please help.

[Christian_Dahlqvist]

Try putting the codec information inside the index block you have specified next to number_of_shards.

[Suryadip_Nag]

Thanks buddy. Yes, it has worked if we put like below.

"settings" : {
"index" : {
"codec" : "best_compression"

But in 5.5 it was accepting outside the index block. Strange!

[Christian_Dahlqvist]

Elasticsearch has been improving validations so it is possible this is a side effect of that. The dot notation would probably work if you did not already have the index block present.

[Suryadip_Nag]

Yeah got it. Cool.

Thanks for your help for resolving the issue.

[Suryadip_Nag]

Hi Christian,

I just wanted to update you as this info might be useful for Elasticsearch team.

As I mentioned that codec tag worked if I move it to under index. But it is also working if we put index.codec outside the index tag but inside the settings tag. Like below.

{
"order": 0,
"template": "junoslogs-*",
"settings": {
"index.refresh_interval": "5s",
"index.codec": "best_compression",
"index":{
"number_of_shards" : 2,
"number_of_replicas" : 0,

But yeah, outside the settings it is not working like I faced the issue as reported.

[Christian_Dahlqvist]

Aha. It has to be under settings and I did not notice this was the case in the initial post as it was not indented properly.