On 3/19/14, 4:25 AM, Dunaeth wrote: > There's no aggregation in percolation queries and we only percolate new > documents, the flow is as follow : > > Step 1 : data logging > 1. An event occures > 2. possible ES search queries with or without facet on different indices > 3. ES percolation query with event data on the tester index (5 queries > stored, no other data) > 4. event data logging in a plain text file > > Step 2 : defered data indexing > 1. logstash detects the new event and send it to a centralized redis > queue like the centralized example described in logstash documentation > 2. logstash parses the queue and indexes the event in ES > > Meanwhile, there can be aggregation queries on the stat part of the > application but their rate is minimal compared to the insert rate.
Okay, so we'll rule out percolation for now as a cause of the circuit breaker estimations. More information about your data would be helpful, you sent the mapping, can you send an example document that is similar to most of the documents you're indexing? Can you also provide some of the queries, facets, and aggregations that you're performing? I can try to index some test data and reproduce it with this information and see if that works. Also, if this is not sensitive data, taking a snapshot of the index with the snapshot/restore functionality and sending it to me would allow me to reproduce the issue with your exact data. If that's an option it would definitely be useful. ;; Lee -- 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/532A5557.7010301%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
