Skip to content

Use Elasticsearch 9.5.4 for Aspire development - #2637

Open
ejsmith wants to merge 5 commits into
mainfrom
feature/aspire-elasticsearch-9
Open

ejsmith wants to merge 5 commits into
mainfrom
feature/aspire-elasticsearch-9

Conversation

@ejsmith

@ejsmith ejsmith commented Oct 3, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

Run Aspire development and its backend-test infrastructure on the published exceptionless/elasticsearch:9.5.4 image with mapper-size, and use matching Kibana 9.5.4. This enables local application validation before upgrading the deployed dev cluster.

Use exceptionless.data.v2 so starting Aspire preserves the existing 8.x volume instead of upgrading its data directory in place. The volume version increments for breaking data changes. Existing local data is not migrated automatically. No application API, client-library, index-schema, Compose, or deployed-cluster configuration changes.

Compatibility and release review

Verification

  • Published image manifest includes Linux AMD64 and ARM64.
  • Local Elasticsearch reports 9.5.4 with mapper-size 9.5.4 using a fresh volume; Aspire reports Elasticsearch, Kibana, and the API healthy. Runtime checks preceded the final volume-name correction to exceptionless.data.v2; that correction was verified statically.
  • Hosted Build at d7afc72c: all four backend shards and test-api, all six browser shards and test-e2e, test-client, and Docker build passed.
  • Full local backend run on 9.5.4: 3,086 passed, 3 opt-in tests skipped, 4 failed. The same four failures reproduce from the existing main checkout: one Windows CRLF OpenAPI-description mismatch and three source-map file-storage tests. Hosted Linux CI passes these tests; no unrelated test/source changes are included.

Breaking changes

No public API changes. Local Aspire starts with fresh Elasticsearch data; the previous exceptionless.data.v1 volume remains available for 8.x.

@ejsmith
ejsmith marked this pull request as ready for review October 3, 2026 19:57
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 3, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-04T22:31:24.434819Z b9dc2e9 New commits
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 5143fea498

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/Exceptionless.AppHost/Program.cs
@ejsmith
ejsmith force-pushed the feature/aspire-elasticsearch-9 branch from 5143fea to b9dc2e9 Compare October 4, 2026 22:29
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Oct 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Code Coverage

Package Line Rate Branch Rate Complexity Health
Exceptionless.AppHost 23% 23% 128 ❌
Exceptionless.Core 77% 68% 10825 ✔
Exceptionless.Insulation 51% 43% 370 ➖
Exceptionless.Web 86% 70% 9173 ✔
Summary 80% (27814 / 34875) 69% (13749 / 20064) 20496 ✔

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant