Generate docs and tag for release

Author: codebrain

docs/aggregations.asciidoc

@@ -134,6 +134,8 @@ In addition to the buckets themselves, the bucket aggregations also compute and
 
 * <<geo-tile-grid-aggregation-usage,Geo Tile Grid Aggregation Usage>>
 
+* <<geo-tile-grid-aggregation-usage,Geo Tile Grid Aggregation Usage>>
+
 * <<global-aggregation-usage,Global Aggregation Usage>>
 
 * <<histogram-aggregation-usage,Histogram Aggregation Usage>>
@@ -193,6 +195,8 @@ include::aggregations/bucket/geo-hash-grid/geo-hash-grid-aggregation-usage.ascii
 
 include::aggregations/bucket/geo-hash-tile/geo-tile-grid-aggregation-usage.asciidoc[]
 
+include::aggregations/bucket/geo-tile-grid/geo-tile-grid-aggregation-usage.asciidoc[]
+
 include::aggregations/bucket/global/global-aggregation-usage.asciidoc[]
 
 include::aggregations/bucket/histogram/histogram-aggregation-usage.asciidoc[]

docs/aggregations/bucket/geo-tile-grid/geo-tile-grid-aggregation-usage.asciidoc

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+:ref_current: https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/7.0
+
+:github: https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch-net
+
+:nuget: https://www.nuget.org/packages
+
+////
+IMPORTANT NOTE
+==============
+This file has been generated from https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch-net/tree/7.x/src/Tests/Tests/Aggregations/Bucket/GeoTileGrid/GeoTileGridAggregationUsageTests.cs. 
+If you wish to submit a PR for any spelling mistakes, typos or grammatical errors for this file,
+please modify the original csharp file found at the link and submit the PR with that change. Thanks!
+////
+
+[[geo-tile-grid-aggregation-usage]]
+=== Geo Tile Grid Aggregation Usage
+
+==== Fluent DSL example
+
+[source,csharp]
+----
+a => a
+.GeoTile("my_geotile", g => g
+    .Field(p => p.LocationPoint)
+    .Precision(GeoTilePrecision.Precision3)
+    .Size(1000)
+    .ShardSize(100)
+)
+----
+
+==== Object Initializer syntax example
+
+[source,csharp]
+----
+new GeoTileGridAggregation("my_geotile")
+{
+    Field = Field<Project>(p => p.LocationPoint),
+    Precision = GeoTilePrecision.Precision3,
+    Size = 1000,
+    ShardSize = 100
+}
+----
+
+[source,javascript]
+.Example json output
+----
+{
+  "my_geotile": {
+    "geotile_grid": {
+      "field": "locationPoint",
+      "precision": 3,
+      "size": 1000,
+      "shard_size": 100
+    }
+  }
+}
+----
+
+==== Handling Responses
+
+[source,csharp]
+----
+response.ShouldBeValid();
+var myGeoTileGrid = response.Aggregations.GeoTile("my_geotile");
+myGeoTileGrid.Should().NotBeNull();
+var firstBucket = myGeoTileGrid.Buckets.First();
+firstBucket.Key.Should().NotBeNullOrWhiteSpace();
+firstBucket.DocCount.Should().BeGreaterThan(0);
+----
+

docs/aggregations/bucket/parent/parent-aggregation-usage.asciidoc

@@ -47,7 +47,6 @@ new ParentAggregation("name_of_parent_agg", typeof(CommitActivity)) <1>
 }
 ----
 <1> `join` field is determined from the _child_ type. In this example, it is `CommitActivity`
-
 <2> sub-aggregations are on the type determined from the `join` field. In this example, a `Project` is a parent of `CommitActivity`
 
 [source,javascript]

docs/aggregations/writing-aggregations.asciidoc

@@ -232,7 +232,6 @@ return s => s
         );
 ----
 <1> a list of aggregation functions to apply
-
 <2> Using LINQ's `Aggregate()` function to accumulate/apply all of the aggregation functions
 
 [[handling-aggregate-response]]
@@ -276,6 +275,5 @@ var maxPerChild = childAggregation.Max("max_per_child");
 maxPerChild.Should().NotBeNull(); <2>
 ----
 <1> Do something with the average per child. Here we just assert it's not null
-
 <2> Do something with the max per child. Here we just assert it's not null
 

docs/client-concepts/connection-pooling/exceptions/unexpected-exceptions.asciidoc

@@ -58,11 +58,8 @@ audit = await audit.TraceUnexpectedException(
 );
 ----
 <1> set up a cluster with 10 nodes
-
 <2> where node 2 on port 9201 always throws an exception
-
 <3> The first call to 9200 returns a healthy response
-
 <4> ...but the second call, to 9201, returns a bad response
 
 Sometimes, an unexpected exception happens further down in the pipeline. In this scenario, we
@@ -97,9 +94,7 @@ audit = await audit.TraceUnexpectedException(
 );
 ----
 <1> calls on 9200 set up to throw a `HttpRequestException`
-
 <2> calls on 9201 set up to throw an `Exception`
-
 <3> Assert that the audit trail for the client call includes the bad response from 9200 and 9201
 
 An unexpected hard exception on ping and sniff is something we *do* try to recover from and failover to retrying on the next node.
@@ -144,8 +139,6 @@ audit = await audit.TraceUnexpectedException(
 );
 ----
 <1> `InnerException` is the exception that brought the request down
-
 <2> The hard exception that happened on ping is still available though
-
 <3> An exception can be hard to relate back to a point in time, so the exception is also available on the audit trail
 

docs/client-concepts/connection-pooling/exceptions/unrecoverable-exceptions.asciidoc

@@ -81,7 +81,6 @@ var audit = new Auditor(() => VirtualClusterWith
 );
 ----
 <1> Always succeed on ping
-
 <2> ...but always fail on calls with a 401 Bad Authentication response
 
 Now, let's make a client call. We'll see that the first audit event is a successful ping
@@ -102,9 +101,7 @@ audit = await audit.TraceElasticsearchException(
 );
 ----
 <1> First call results in a successful ping
-
 <2> Second call results in a bad response
-
 <3> The reason for the bad response is Bad Authentication
 
 When a bad authentication response occurs, the client attempts to deserialize the response body returned;
@@ -138,7 +135,6 @@ audit = await audit.TraceElasticsearchException(
 );
 ----
 <1> Always return a 401 bad response with a HTML response on client calls
-
 <2> Assert that the response body bytes are null
 
 Now in this example, by turning on `DisableDirectStreaming()` on `ConnectionSettings`, we see the same behaviour exhibited
@@ -173,6 +169,5 @@ audit = await audit.TraceElasticsearchException(
 );
 ----
 <1> Response bytes are set on the response
-
 <2> Assert that the response contains `"nginx/"`
 

docs/client-concepts/connection-pooling/request-overrides/disable-sniff-ping-per-request.asciidoc

@@ -65,11 +65,8 @@ audit = await audit.TraceCalls(
 );
 ----
 <1> disable sniffing
-
 <2> first call is a successful ping
-
 <3> sniff on startup call happens here, on the second call
-
 <4> No sniff on startup again
 
 Now, let's disable pinging on the request 
@@ -93,7 +90,6 @@ audit = await audit.TraceCall(
 );
 ----
 <1> disable ping
-
 <2> No ping after sniffing
 
 Finally, let's demonstrate disabling both sniff and ping on the request 
@@ -115,6 +111,5 @@ audit = await audit.TraceCall(
 );
 ----
 <1> diable ping and sniff
-
 <2> no ping or sniff before the call
 

docs/client-concepts/connection-pooling/round-robin/skip-dead-nodes.asciidoc

@@ -140,9 +140,7 @@ await audit.TraceCalls(
 );
 ----
 <1> The first call goes to 9200 which succeeds
-
 <2> The 2nd call does a ping on 9201 because its used for the first time. It fails so we wrap over to node 9202
-
 <3> The next call goes to 9203 which fails so we should wrap over
 
 A cluster with 2 nodes where the second node fails on ping 
@@ -193,6 +191,5 @@ await audit.TraceCalls(
 );
 ----
 <1> All the calls fail
-
 <2> After all our registered nodes are marked dead we want to sample a single dead node each time to quickly see if the cluster is back up. We do not want to retry all 4 nodes
 

docs/client-concepts/connection-pooling/sniffing/role-detection.asciidoc

@@ -138,7 +138,6 @@ var audit = new Auditor(() => VirtualClusterWith
 };
 ----
 <1> Before the sniff, assert we only see three master only nodes
-
 <2> After the sniff, assert we now know about the existence of 20 nodes.
 
 After the sniff has happened on 9200 before the first API call, assert that the subsequent API
@@ -219,9 +218,7 @@ var audit = new Auditor(() => VirtualClusterWith
 };
 ----
 <1> for testing simplicity, disable pings
-
 <2> We only want to execute API calls to nodes in rack_one
-
 <3> After sniffing on startup, assert that the pool of nodes that the client will execute API calls against only contains the three nodes that are in `rack_one`
 
 With the cluster set up, assert that the sniff happens on 9200 before the first API call
@@ -298,8 +295,6 @@ await audit.TraceUnexpectedElasticsearchException(new ClientCall
 });
 ----
 <1> The audit trail indicates a sniff for the very first time on startup
-
 <2> The sniff succeeds because the node predicate is ignored when sniffing
-
 <3> when trying to do an actual API call however, the predicate prevents any nodes from being attempted
 

docs/client-concepts/connection/configuration-options.asciidoc

@@ -190,6 +190,10 @@ Instead of following a c/go like error checking on response.IsValid do throw an
 +
 Reasons for such exceptions could be search parser errors, index missing exceptions, etc...
 
+`UserAgent`::
+
+The user agent string to send with requests. Useful for debugging purposes to understand client and framework versions that initiate requests to Elasticsearch
+
 :xml-docs: Elasticsearch.Net:ConnectionConfiguration`1
 
 ==== ConnectionConfiguration with ElasticLowLevelClient