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

Add Migration Assistant Type Mapping documentation #9164

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AndreKurait
Copy link
Member

Description

Add Migration Assistant Type Mapping documentation

Issues Resolved

MIGRATIONS-2385

Version

all (Migration Assistant 2.1.5+)

Frontend features

n/a

Checklist

  • By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license and subject to the Developers Certificate of Origin.
    For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 7, 2025

Thank you for submitting your PR. The PR states are In progress (or Draft) -> Tech review -> Doc review -> Editorial review -> Merged.

Before you submit your PR for doc review, make sure the content is technically accurate. If you need help finding a tech reviewer, tag a maintainer.

When you're ready for doc review, tag the assignee of this PR. The doc reviewer may push edits to the PR directly or leave comments and editorial suggestions for you to address (let us know in a comment if you have a preference). The doc reviewer will arrange for an editorial review.

Copy link
Member

@peternied peternied left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for writing this up.

Lets consider reframing this documentation for a user they doesn't know if they use this deprecated feature, this kind of jumps into 'what to do' without enough context for a user to know if they are impacted and why they should make different choices.

@Naarcha-AWS Naarcha-AWS added migration 3 - Tech review PR: Tech review in progress labels Feb 11, 2025
@Naarcha-AWS
Copy link
Collaborator

@AndreKurait: Let me know once you've implemented @peternied and @mikaylathompson's feedback and I'll begin the writer review process.

Copy link

@gregschohn gregschohn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd recommend two solutions - the first would be to pick up a bit more information from the README file for the transformer.

The second would be to simplify the deployment. Redeploying infrastructure isn't very appealing. Instead, we could

  1. deploy a new EFS volume (for any deployment configuration) for transformation configurations;
  2. Add documentation to give the customer a command to add a configuration file (ssm copy, vi /sharedTransformConfigs/...);
  3. have the container entrypoints check for that config file for type mappings sanitization and just add the arguments;
  4. Add documentation so to indicate how to run/restart commands

@AndreKurait
Copy link
Member Author

AndreKurait commented Feb 20, 2025

@gregschohn

I'd recommend two solutions - the first would be to pick up a bit more information from the README file for the transformer.

Let me know what additional information you would like me to add here

The second would be to simplify the deployment. Redeploying infrastructure isn't very appealing. Instead, we could

  1. deploy a new EFS volume (for any deployment configuration) for transformation configurations;
  2. Add documentation to give the customer a command to add a configuration file (ssm copy, vi /sharedTransformConfigs/...);
  3. have the container entrypoints check for that config file for type mappings sanitization and just add the arguments;
  4. Add documentation so to indicate how to run/restart commands

Tracking this in https://opensearch.atlassian.net/browse/MIGRATIONS-2410

Signed-off-by: Andre Kurait <[email protected]>
@AndreKurait
Copy link
Member Author

@Naarcha-AWS Ready for review

Copy link
Member

@peternied peternied left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know there are still some outstanding comment threads around technical implementation, but I think this is a great starting point that we can refine in future releases. Thanks for iterating on this one @AndreKurait

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3 - Tech review PR: Tech review in progress migration
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants