dynamic templates are parsed OK but fail during index creation

[faxm0dem]

When applying dynamic templates, the following config gets applied OK, but triggers the following error message when ES tries to create the index:

org.elasticsearch.index.mapper.MapperParsingException: A dynamic template must be defined with a name

        "dynamic_templates" : [ {
          "number_fields" : {
            "mapping" : {
              "type" : "float"
            },
            "match_pattern" : "regex",
            "match" : "^(duration|.*_num|.*_dur)$",
            "match_mapping_type" : "string"
          },
          "integer_fields" : {
            "mapping" : {
              "type" : "integer"
            },
            "match_pattern" : "regex",
            "match" : "^(integer|.*_int|.*_len|port|pid|uid|gid|PID|UID|GID|TID|PRI|.*_NUM)$",
            "match_mapping_type" : "string"
          },
          "string_fields" : {
            "mapping" : {
              "type" : "multi_field",
              "fields" : {
                "raw" : {
                  "index" : "not_analyzed",
                  "ignore_above" : 256,
                  "type" : "string"
                },
                "{name}" : {
                  "index" : "analyzed",
                  "omit_norms" : true,
                  "type" : "string"
                }
              }
            },
            "match_mapping_type" : "string",
            "match" : "*"
          }
        } ],

When Only one key exists, e.g. "string_fields", then all is good

[kzwang]

@faxm0dem the dynamic template should be an array of objects

this is what you got:

{
  "dynamic_templates": [
    {
      "number_fields": {
        "mapping": {
          "type": "float"
        },
        "match_pattern": "regex",
        "match": "^(duration|.*_num|.*_dur)$",
        "match_mapping_type": "string"
      },
      "integer_fields": {
        "mapping": {
          "type": "integer"
        },
        "match_pattern": "regex",
        "match": "^(integer|.*_int|.*_len|port|pid|uid|gid|PID|UID|GID|TID|PRI|.*_NUM)$",
        "match_mapping_type": "string"
      },
      "string_fields": {
        "mapping": {
          "type": "multi_field",
          "fields": {
            "raw": {
              "index": "not_analyzed",
              "ignore_above": 256,
              "type": "string"
            },
            "{name}": {
              "index": "analyzed",
              "omit_norms": true,
              "type": "string"
            }
          }
        },
        "match_mapping_type": "string",
        "match": "*"
      }
    }
  ]
}

and this is the correct one:

{
  "dynamic_templates": [
    {
      "number_fields": {
        "mapping": {
          "type": "float"
        },
        "match_pattern": "regex",
        "match": "^(duration|.*_num|.*_dur)$",
        "match_mapping_type": "string"
      }
    },
    {
      "integer_fields": {
        "mapping": {
          "type": "integer"
        },
        "match_pattern": "regex",
        "match": "^(integer|.*_int|.*_len|port|pid|uid|gid|PID|UID|GID|TID|PRI|.*_NUM)$",
        "match_mapping_type": "string"
      }
    },
    {
      "string_fields": {
        "mapping": {
          "type": "multi_field",
          "fields": {
            "raw": {
              "index": "not_analyzed",
              "ignore_above": 256,
              "type": "string"
            },
            "{name}": {
              "index": "analyzed",
              "omit_norms": true,
              "type": "string"
            }
          }
        },
        "match_mapping_type": "string",
        "match": "*"
      }
    }
  ]
}

[faxm0dem]

Thanks, I'll try that.
However, I there should be an input validation, what's your opinion on that?

[clintongormley]

Closing in favour of #8802