-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 419
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 event.ingested as the ingest timestamp #582
Changes from 2 commits
ed86967
443da9b
18b1d0c
8e5023e
b536afc
9f41717
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -276,3 +276,11 @@ | |
|
||
This is mainly useful if you use more than one system that assigns | ||
risk scores, and you want to see a normalized value across all systems. | ||
|
||
- name: ingested | ||
level: core | ||
type: date | ||
short: Ingest timestamp | ||
description: > | ||
Time when the event was ingested. This is different from `@timestamp` | ||
which is when the event originally occurred. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think we should be a little more explicit in the relationship with Here's what I'm thinking: short: Timestamp when an event arrived in the central data store
description: >
Timestamp when an event arrived in the central data store.
This is different from `@timestamp`, which is when the event originally occurred.
It's also different from `event.created`, which is meant to capture the first time an agent saw the event.
In normal conditions, assuming no tampering, the timestamps should chronologically look like this: `@timestamp` < `event.created` < `event.ingested`. Just like |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
extended?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would like to introduce it directly as core. From the feedback we've seen, this timestamp is considered more useful than
event.created
.A few reasons why that is so:
PRs such as elastic/beats#14001 could also help populating it broadly and reliably, without having to revisit all modules or all beats.
If you have strong feelings and would really prefer to start by introducing as extended, I can go with that, in order to get this in quickly. But I think it would send the wrong message wrt to this timestamp's importance vs
event.created
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll wait for your response on this, and would like to merge this tomorrow if possible
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
SGTM