IMHO I think ES can still be smart enough to calculate that formula dynamically since it knows when servers are being added to the cluster, correct? As for the node crash it's still a crash and if user wants to decomission the node then the better way would be to explicitly run a decomission command to indicate that nodes is not part of cluster anymore? Is there any problem with this logic?
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 9:15 AM, [email protected] < [email protected]> wrote: > Unicast is a nightmare for large ES deployments, with provisioning and > failures all the time. I'm used to DHCP/TFTP/PXE in my DC thanks to RedHat > so why should I waste time setting up hostnames or count hosts for ES? > > Jörg > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 5:17 PM, InquiringMind <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> One more reason to prefer unicast over multicast! >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "elasticsearch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAKdsXoGdS1h-f85Tk-h8SBY92eqfXEvrGV6E0sqPNwkbXrfaxA%40mail.gmail.com > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAOT3TWoCEg%3DL-wDNXR1mFFScDZT%2BTxUsAoyBZ31OHoLtEyo6uA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
