Support running multiple log groups in cloudwatch input

[kaiyan-sheng]

What does this PR do?

This PR is to fix aws-cloudwatch input when log_group_name_prefix config parameter is given. With this PR, we should be able to specify a number_of_workers to control how many workers are running at the same time. This also represents how many log groups are being accessed at the same time to collect logs.

This PR also migrates the aws-cloudwatch input to use Filebeat Input V2 and added integration test for it.

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
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have added an entry in CHANGELOG.next.asciidoc or CHANGELOG-developer.next.asciidoc.

How to test this PR locally

In your test AWS environment, create several log groups starting with the same name, such as /foo/test/log_group_1, /foo/test/log_group_2 and etc. Also, create some log entries for testing. Then edit filebeat.yml to use the aws-cloudwatch input to read logs:

filebeat.inputs:
- type: aws-cloudwatch
  enabled: true
  credential_profile_name: elastic-beats
  log_group_name_prefix: /kaiyan/test
  region_name: us-east-1
  number_of_workers: 2

Related issues

• Closes [Filebeat 7.14.2] Adding log_group_name_prefix in aws-cloudwatch input #29006

[mergify]

This pull request does not have a backport label. Could you fix it @kaiyan-sheng? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

• backport-v./d./d./d is the label to automatically backport to the 7./d branch. /d is the digit

NOTE: backport-skip has been added to this pull request.

[elasticmachine]

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

• Start Time: 2022-01-25T03:54:46.436+0000

• Duration: 180 min 20 sec

• Commit: 3e4060f

Test stats 🧪

Test	Results
Failed	0
Passed	20999
Skipped	797
Total	21796

💚 Flaky test report

Tests succeeded.

🤖 GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

• /test : Re-trigger the build.

• /package : Generate the packages and run the E2E tests.

• /beats-tester : Run the installation tests with beats-tester.

• run elasticsearch-ci/docs : Re-trigger the docs validation. (use unformatted text in the comment!)

[mergify]

This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you can check out it locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

git fetch upstream
git checkout -b fix_cloudwatch_input upstream/fix_cloudwatch_input
git merge upstream/master
git push upstream fix_cloudwatch_input

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/integrations (Team:Integrations)

[aspacca]

great refactoring! 👍

[mergify]

This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you can check out it locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

git fetch upstream
git checkout -b fix_cloudwatch_input upstream/fix_cloudwatch_input
git merge upstream/master
git push upstream fix_cloudwatch_input

[kaiyan-sheng]

@Mergifyio backport 7.17

[mergify]

backport 7.17

❌ No backport have been created

• Backport to branch 7.17 failed: Git reported the following error:

fatal: couldn't find remote ref master

[RobsonSutton]

@kaiyan-sheng & @v1v - Hey 👋 Quick question if that's okay:
From the looks of the above, the aws-cloudwatch bug fix wasn't successfully backported to v7.17.x.
Do you know if this would be achievable at all? e.g. cherry pick the commits to point at 7.17.x and merge this under a separate PR or something?

[olivierots]

@kaiyan-sheng & @v1v - Hey 👋 Quick question if that's okay: From the looks of the above, the aws-cloudwatch bug fix wasn't successfully backported to v7.17.x. Do you know if this would be achievable at all? e.g. cherry pick the commits to point at 7.17.x and merge this under a separate PR or something?

@kaiyan-sheng - please let us know if this is possible ^^ currently experiencing the same problem as Robson

[kaiyan-sheng]

Hello, I backported this PR into 7.17 so it should be released with 7.17.6 version.

[RobsonSutton]

@kaiyan-sheng - You absolute star 🌟 Thank you!!