(executor): Add logging to HttpElasticExecutor

[dbulaja98]

No description provided.

[drmarjanovic]

1. Does it make more sense to use DEBUG level instead?
2. What about using logDebug(...) *> request.get(...)?
3. Should we provide more arguments? Executing create or update document... is not useful too much... Maybe we should provide index, routing, documentId, body, etc.

@arnoldlacko

[arnoldlacko]

1. Does it make more sense to use DEBUG level instead?
2. What about using logDebug(...) *> request.get(...)?
3. Should we provide more arguments? Executing create or update document... is not useful too much... Maybe we should provide index, routing, documentId, body, etc.

@arnoldlacko

1. I think that makes sense to use debug
2. I think both *> and _ <- are fine and we should choose based on what looks better in this case. Given that sending the request is a multi-liner, I think the for-comprehension might be slightly nicer here, unless we extract that part.
3. I'm thinking that library-level logs could be useful only if we provide information that is not visible through the API. What comes to mind is the raw request we send to ES and the raw response that we receive (with the additional meta-data that we don't expose in the response.