Search merge requestshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests2024-02-08T11:47:00Zhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/621Draft: fix tests2024-02-08T11:47:00ZVidyaDharani LokamDraft: fix testshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/620Draft: Az/vl test2024-02-06T18:19:10ZVidyaDharani LokamDraft: Az/vl test## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/609Search update ibm lib version2023-12-28T10:16:03ZIsha KumariSearch update ibm lib versionSearch update ibm lib versionSearch update ibm lib versionM22 - Release 0.25Isha KumariIsha Kumarihttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/589Health api2023-12-03T20:26:53ZRiabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]Health api## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/588Changed a common path for health api2023-12-03T20:44:35ZRiabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]Changed a common path for health api## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Clou...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
search/v2/liveness_check
search/v2/readiness_check
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
Yeshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/586Fix vulnerabilities2023-11-27T21:57:31ZVaibhavi KamaniFix vulnerabilities## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
- [x] S360 fix
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in ...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
- [x] S360 fix
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [x] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBMVaibhavi KamaniVaibhavi Kamanihttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/582Draft: Empty change in m162023-10-23T20:07:28ZAdrian SaliDraft: Empty change in m16## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/581Draft: Add empty change2023-10-25T23:09:13ZAdrian SaliDraft: Add empty change## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/578Cherry-pick 'Vulnerability fixes for jackson-databind' into release/0.242023-10-19T11:36:50ZChad LeongCherry-pick 'Vulnerability fixes for jackson-databind' into release/0.24**Original MR**: !565
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporati...**Original MR**: !565
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporating all changes in the default branch.
These MRs must be approved by the PMC before they are merged, since they alter the scope of the release.
To see more details about the change itself, look at the Original MR listed above.
#### Skipped Pipeline
Normally, pipelines are not executed on the cherry pick branch/MR prior to merging.
This optimization is accepted because the code was tested when it merged into the default branch, and will be tested again in the release branch prior to tagging.
However, if anybody feels that the MR requires further scrutiny -- whether because it had conflicts in the cherry-picking, it interfaces with some drastically altered logic between the branches, or any other reason -- we can run the pipeline here prior to merging.
#### If There's Reason to Run a Pipeline
If you want to see a pipeline result before this merges, first add a comment explaining why you'd like to see the pipeline results so the PMC and others know your thinking.
Then, mark the MR as a Draft MR (using the vertical ellipsis above, choose 'Mark as Draft').
This prevents the MR from being approved & merged accidentally by a busy release coordinator who didn't see your comment.
Finally, if you are a maintainer on the project, launch a pipeline on this branch.
Since this branch is a protected branch and the MR has ~no-detached-pipeline set, all integration tests will run and there's no need for any `trusted-*` branches.
[Launch a Pipeline for this Branch](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/pipelines/new?ref=cherry-pick-for-565)M21 - Release 0.24David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgChad LeongSrinivasan NarayananDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/571retry in send method update2023-10-20T05:43:00ZHarshika Dhootretry in send method update## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationHarshika DhootHarshika Dhoothttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/568Draft: Dk/az fix upgrade2023-10-11T11:29:16ZDeepa KumariDraft: Dk/az fix upgrade## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationDeepa KumariDeepa Kumarihttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/567Full Upgrade of First Party Library Dependencies2023-10-11T07:38:16ZDeepa KumariFull Upgrade of First Party Library Dependencies## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationDeepa KumariDeepa Kumarihttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/555Draft: Az/sa test pipeline2023-09-19T10:32:32Zsaketh somarajuDraft: Az/sa test pipeline## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/552Upgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.232023-09-05T07:45:00ZDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgUpgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.23This generated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep the OSDU projects utilizing the latest available code to ensure widespread usage and stability.
However, any...This generated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep the OSDU projects utilizing the latest available code to ensure widespread usage and stability.
However, any library that is older than the previous release will be left as-is, since the upgrade is likely to be more complicated.
Furthermore, the upgrade should only be merged in the CI pipeline reports success.
If this MR has failed, we can spend a little time investigating to see if a trivial upgrade could achieve compatiblity to the new library.
But significant upgrade efforts should not occur on this MR, as part of the release tagging process.
Instead, significant work should be scheduled for a subsequent milestone.
### Dependency Information Before the Upgrade
```
Branch: master
SHA: aa6694df6f10f4a52ae4881a8d2269f7d17071e2
Maven: 0.24.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| ----------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.20.0-rc5 | 0.13.0-rc6 |
| core-lib-gc | 0.21.0 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.21.0 | 0.21.0 |
| os-core-common | 0.23.0-rc2 | 0.23.0-rc2 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.16.0-rc1 | 0.15.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.yaml.snakeyaml | 2.0 | 1.26 |
### Dependency Information After the Upgrade
```
Branch: dependency-upgrade
SHA: 7b3a60ffc512521cf7b1536569ad8e073bff307c
Maven: 0.24.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| ----------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.20.0-rc5 | 0.13.0-rc6 |
| core-lib-gc | 0.21.0 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.21.0 | 0.21.0 |
| os-core-common | 0.23.1 | 0.23.1 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.16.0-rc1 | 0.15.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.yaml.snakeyaml | 2.0 | 1.26 |M20 - Release 0.23https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/547Draft: Gonrg 7560 policy update2023-08-24T18:13:39ZYauheni Rykhter (EPAM)Draft: Gonrg 7560 policy updateYauheni Rykhter (EPAM)Yauheni Rykhter (EPAM)https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/533Upgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.222023-07-18T07:06:54ZChad LeongUpgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.22This generated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep the OSDU projects utilizing the latest available code to ensure widespread usage and stability.
However, any...This generated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep the OSDU projects utilizing the latest available code to ensure widespread usage and stability.
However, any library that is older than the previous release will be left as-is, since the upgrade is likely to be more complicated.
Furthermore, the upgrade should only be merged in the CI pipeline reports success.
If this MR has failed, we can spend a little time investigating to see if a trivial upgrade could achieve compatiblity to the new library.
But significant upgrade efforts should not occur on this MR, as part of the release tagging process.
Instead, significant work should be scheduled for a subsequent milestone.
### Dependency Information Before the Upgrade
```
Branch: master
SHA: db0304252cb5708aee16125a4f34f7b04bd38fb7
Maven: 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| ----------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------- | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.20.0-rc5 | 0.13.0-rc6 |
| core-lib-gc | 0.21.0 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.21.0 | 0.21.0 |
| os-core-common | 0.20.0-rc1, 0.19.0, 0.21.0 | 0.19.0 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.16.0-rc1 | 0.15.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.yaml.snakeyaml | 2.0 | 1.26 |
### Dependency Information After the Upgrade
```
Branch: dependency-upgrade-3
SHA: d40ac663270134d4572e877d2b1518ddc635877f
Maven: 0.23.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| ----------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------- | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.20.0-rc5 | 0.13.0-rc6 |
| core-lib-gc | 0.22.1 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.22.0 | 0.22.0 |
| os-core-common | 0.20.0-rc1, 0.19.0, 0.22.0 | 0.19.0 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.16.0-rc1 | 0.15.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.yaml.snakeyaml | 2.0 | 1.26 |M19 - Release 0.22https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/523Fix for a sporadic IT failure2023-08-25T22:30:13ZSabarish K R EFix for a sporadic IT failure## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
- [x] IT Fix
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO] NO
## Does this introduce a chang...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
- [x] IT Fix
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO] NO
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [x] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
One of the MultiKindsValidator test cases fails with an error from search service indicating that the length exceeds 3840 bytes.
This happens because, in the IT, we assume that the hashCode() function used in finding out the Index Alias, always returns positive numbers. So, this case fails when the hashCode() results in negative numbers as the "-" causes the length of the index to increase beyond 3840.
## What is the new/expected behavior?
Modified IT to account for the negative hashCode()
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
Yes
## Any other useful information
The kind's alias uses hashCode() function that sometimes returns negative numbers. The test does not account for the extra character occupied by the - symbol, when the hashCode is used for the construction of index alias namehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/522The kind's alias uses hashCode() function that sometimes returns negative...2023-06-20T07:20:19ZSabarish K R EThe kind's alias uses hashCode() function that sometimes returns negative...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
- [x] IT Fix
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO] NO
## Does this introduce a chang...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
- [x] IT Fix
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO] NO
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [x] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
One of the MultiKindsValidator test cases fails with an error from search service indicating that the length exceeds 3840 bytes.
This happens because, in the IT, we assume that the hashCode() function used in finding out the Index Alias, always returns positive numbers. So, this case fails when the hashCode() results in negative numbers as the "-" causes the length of the index to increase beyond 3840.
## What is the new/expected behavior?
Modified IT to account for the negative hashCode()
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
Yes
## Any other useful information
The kind's alias uses hashCode() function that sometimes returns negative numbers. The test does not account for the extra character occupied by the - symbol, when the hashCode is used for the construction of index alias namehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/520component governance build failure fixed2023-06-27T06:34:52ZHarshika Dhootcomponent governance build failure fixed## Type of change
- [X] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
- NO
## Does this introduce a change in the cl...## Type of change
- [X] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
- NO
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [X] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationHarshika DhootHarshika Dhoothttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/517Draft: enabling vm cache for elasticsearchcred2023-06-28T06:39:43ZAkanksha PrasadDraft: enabling vm cache for elasticsearchcred## Type of change
- [yes] Bug Fix
- [no] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [YES] Azure
## Does this introduc...## Type of change
- [yes] Bug Fix
- [no] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [YES] Azure
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## What is the current behavior?
ElasticSearch Cred is fetched from redis cache which was causing during update of elastic search primary user secret as 500 ,internal server error.This was majorly because,refresh time of redis is 60 minutes.Hence,in that duration 500 status code was returned
## What is the new/expected behavior?
After the duration of secret rotation completed,search should return 200 success status code
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
yes
## Any other useful informationAkanksha PrasadAkanksha Prasad