Update UDP docs for the new executor#260
Conversation
github-actions
Bot
added
reference
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 7b63122f4b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| The name of the table to read from. This is mutually exclusive with `sql` and | ||
| `show`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The table parameter is documented as mutually exclusive with show here, but the same page later defines show="columns" as requiring table and even provides that example. This contradiction makes the operator contract ambiguous for users trying to inspect column metadata and can lead to incorrect query construction. Please align the parameter rules so the show="columns" mode and table requirement are described consistently.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| - name: 'from_stdin' | ||
| description: 'Reads and parses events from standard input.' | ||
| example: 'from_stdin { read_json }' | ||
| path: 'reference/operators/from_stdin' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change adds a dedicated from_tcp reference page, but the operators overview catalog was updated for other new operators while from_tcp was not added. As a result, users browsing /reference/operators won’t see from_tcp in the main list/cards, which makes the new operator much harder to discover from the primary reference entry point.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
|
📦 Preview · View → · 🟢 Live Auto-updates on push |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 7a0828fffc
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
|
|
||
| </ReferenceCard> | ||
|
|
||
| <ReferenceCard title="to_udp" description="Sends one UDP datagram per input event." href="/reference/operators/to_udp"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This new card is inserted in the bytes CardGrid (between save_udp and save_zmq) even though to_udp is documented as an event output operator (category: Outputs/Events in reference/operators/to_udp.mdx). On /reference/operators, users browse by section headings, so keeping to_udp under bytes makes it easy to miss and misclassifies its usage model. Move it to the Events section so discoverability and categorization match the operator contract.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
jachris
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: da3fb7dcc6
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| } | ||
| write_syslog | ||
| save_udp "1.2.3.4:514" | ||
| to_udp "1.2.3.4:514" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This example now pipes write_syslog directly into to_udp without a message argument, but to_udp defaults to sending each input event as compact JSON when message is omitted. In this specific pipeline, that changes the wire payload from a raw RFC 5424 syslog line to JSON-encoded output, so readers following the example will not actually emit the message format described below the snippet.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
Rename the UDP event-operator references and move the operator\npage to accept_udp. This keeps the guides and reference index\naligned with the neo operator rename.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 63be85229d
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| | `tcp` | <Op>load_tcp</Op> | `from "tcp://127.0.0.1:13245" { read_json }` | | ||
| | `udp` | <Op>load_udp</Op> | `from "udp://127.0.0.1:56789" { read_json }` | | ||
| | `zmq` | <Op>load_zmq</Op> | `from "zmq://127.0.0.1:56789" { read_json }` | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
from URI table
Removing the udp row from the from URI-scheme table makes the reference internally inconsistent: other docs in this repo still instruct users to run from "udp://..." (for example, reference/operators/assert_throughput.mdx), so readers can no longer discover the documented UDP from path from the canonical scheme list. Either keep the UDP mapping here or update all remaining UDP-URI usage docs in the same change.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
🔍 Problem
from_udp.accept_udpsurface.🛠️ Solution
from_udptoaccept_udp.accept_udp.to_udpreferences aligned with the code PR.💬 Review
accept_udp.