ECH: Move nodes off allocator doc updated

[eedugon]

As described in #1527, this PR is promoting a knowledge article into our existing doc, per @kunisen and support team request.

Preview:

• Understanding node moves and system maintenance

Changes:

• Title updated
• Email notifications section fixed (it wasn't valid).
• Content of mentioned KB integrated into the doc.

Links to existing KB:

• Public link
• Internal link

Closes #1527

[eedugon]

@kunisen , about the comment you have shared:

But one thing I just noticed, is maybe we could add a "Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)" sub heading in the page so that readers can understand we included a bunch of FAQs.

The headings are in "Q&A" format style already, but that's something I wasn't sure if it was the right approach, and I wanted to double check that with other docs folks.

I agree if the headings are kept in this Q&A format, then a "Frequently Asked Questions" heading would make all sense, but maybe we rewrite the headers to be in a different format.

cc: @shainaraskas , what would you say?

[jakommo]

Left a few small comments, but other than that LGTM!

[shainaraskas]

The headings are in "Q&A" format style already, but that's something I wasn't sure if it was the right approach, and I wanted to double check that with other docs folks.

I agree if the headings are kept in this Q&A format, then a "Frequently Asked Questions" heading would make all sense, but maybe we rewrite the headers to be in a different format.

this isn't really in our style (reasoning) and could be reworked

a couple of them should be removed (e.g. the support CTA), or integrated into the doc ("Could such a system maintenance be avoided or skipped?" should just be introductory information about why this happens and its inevitability)

some could be pulled into an "Availability during system maintenance" section and perhaps "Data loss risk for non-HA deployments"

some of them could be reworded ("How can I be notified when a node is changed?" > "Notifications for moved or changed nodes" [more task-based]).

I do think that if we want to keep these together, they do need a heading of their own so they're not nested below "Possible causes and impact"

[eedugon]

@shainaraskas : I'll do some rework on this to avoid the FAQ style while keeping all the key points we want to communicate to the users. Thanks a lot for your feedback!

[kunisen]

Thanks for being patient and all the help! 🙏

[1]

I made a bunch of updates based on internal ticket comments - https://github.com/elastic/support-tech-lead/issues/1576#issuecomment-2948156720.

Here's the preview:
https://docs-v3-preview.elastic.dev/elastic/docs-content/pull/1619/troubleshoot/monitoring/node-moves-outages

[2]

@eedugon I totally get what you and @shainaraskas said above #1619 (comment). Please feel free to make any updates from docs perspective based on your writing standard.

I still added FAQ heading because if we don't have this, it's logically unbalanced and not ready for being merged.
I know it's not clearing the docs criteria, but in case it takes long or great effort to reorganize the wordings, it's technically and logically ready for merge, which means we could do the merge first, and then think about the wording improvement next.

Again, please feel free to make your change even including the removal of that one.

[3]

Also, I believe it's technically clear now so no longer need to discuss anything further internally. But if still anything is technically unclear or regarding the expectation, let's still discuss it internally ha :)

[github-actions]

🔍 Preview links for changed docs:

• troubleshoot/monitoring/node-moves-outages.md

🔔 The preview site may take up to 3 minutes to finish building. These links will become live once it completes.

[kunisen]

Hi @shainaraskas

Thank you so much for all the detailed suggestions. Very clear and helpful!

Based on your suggestion, I almost rewrote the whole page in a more logical way.
I started to understand your point of not using Q&A, as well as how to make them in a declarative way.
I am still a beginner on this so my change might include confusing parts (and if so please kindly help me make edits), but I think the whole passage now makes more logical sense.

That said, may I trouble you to review it again and see if we could publish this one in this week please?

Motivation of my proactive work on this is because we yet got another ask by users and our team members, and I want to make it publish as soon as we could. Thanks for your patience and understanding again!

cc @eedugon
cc @alstolten

[kunisen]

Also @shainaraskas could you help solve this please?

https://github.com/elastic/docs-content/actions/runs/15755256766

'connectors-kibana/email-action-type.md' is not a valid link in the 'kibana' cross link index: https://elastic-docs-link-index.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/elastic/kibana/main/links.json

I have no idea about how to refer to a kibana doc in cloud docs...

[eedugon]

Thanks @kunisen ! It feels and reads well to me, let's see if @shainaraskas can do a final review hopefully next week.

I've only updated one minor thing:

• I've added the error message in a code block, as it's what we are doing in the majority of documents, and visually feels much better.

• Also the screenshot in this case doesn't add almost any value. If the reader is interested on how the activity page looks like they have the link right there that takes you to the activity page where there's a nice screenshot available. In the KB article I agree the screenshot might have more sense, but in the web and with the context of the Activity page link, I don't feel it adds much value (and we try to minimize the amount of screenshots to maintain).

I hope this is ok for you too! Let us know otherwise, and we can see how to introduce also the screenshot view.