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

Revert "Backport #16482 to 7.17: Bugfix for BufferedTokenizer" #16713

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 21, 2024

Conversation

donoghuc
Copy link
Member

Release notes

What does this PR do?

Reverts #16482, as applied to 7.17

Why is it important/What is the impact to the user?

Strings handled by the buffered tokenizer could be double-encoded, presenting problems.

Checklist

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have made corresponding change to the default configuration files (and/or docker env variables)
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works

Author's Checklist

  • [ ]

How to test this PR locally

Related issues

Use cases

Screenshots

Logs

…to completely consume lines in case of lines bigger then sizeLimit (elastic#16577)"

This reverts commit b4ca550.
@donoghuc donoghuc changed the title Revert "Backport #16482 to 7.17: Bugfix for BufferedTokenizer to comp… Revert "Backport #16482 to 7.17: Bugfix for BufferedTokenizer Nov 21, 2024
@donoghuc donoghuc changed the title Revert "Backport #16482 to 7.17: Bugfix for BufferedTokenizer Revert "Backport #16482 to 7.17: Bugfix for BufferedTokenizer" Nov 21, 2024
Copy link
Member

@jsvd jsvd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, please merge once CI is green.

@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

💚 Build Succeeded

@donoghuc donoghuc merged commit bd1fa4e into elastic:7.17 Nov 21, 2024
3 checks passed
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.

3 participants