PropName on mapper – How to solve this Elasticsearch exception

Opster Team

August-23, Version: 7.9-7.15

Before you dig into reading this guide, have you tried asking OpsGPT what this log means? You’ll receive a customized analysis of your log.

Try OpsGPT now for step-by-step guidance and tailored insights into your Elasticsearch operation.

Briefly, this error occurs when there’s an attempt to modify an existing field or add a new field with the same name but different properties in Elasticsearch. This is not allowed as Elasticsearch requires consistency in field mappings. To resolve this, you can either delete and recreate the index with the new mapping, or create a new index with a different name and the desired mapping. If the data is important, reindex the data from the old index to the new one. Be sure to define mappings correctly before indexing data.

For a complete solution to your to your search operation, try for free AutoOps for Elasticsearch & OpenSearch . With AutoOps and Opster’s proactive support, you don’t have to worry about your search operation – we take charge of it. Get improved performance & stability with less hardware.

This guide will help you check for common problems that cause the log ” [” + propName + “] on mapper [ ” to appear. To understand the issues related to this log, read the explanation below about the following Elasticsearch concepts: index.

Log Context

Log “[” + propName + “] on mapper [” class name is We extracted the following from Elasticsearch source code for those seeking an in-depth context :

 deprecationLogger.deprecate(DeprecationCategory.MAPPINGS; propName;
 "Parameter [{}] is deprecated and will be removed in a future version";
 if (propNode == null && parameter.acceptsNull == false) {
 throw new MapperParsingException("[" + propName + "] on mapper [" + name
 + "] of type [" + type + "] must not have a [null] value");
 parameter.parse(name; parserContext; propNode);


How helpful was this guide?

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?