There's a difference in FS cache and then do an actual read from the FS, the latter being a lot slower. If you have SSDs, then this might be feasible.
But overall you're potentially wasting a lot of resources. On 18 November 2014 18:12, Christopher Ambler <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't see how that's an issue. > > Data needs to be stored somewhere. If I'm hitting disk often, I'm going to > do so no matter what, no matter where. > > So why not have the data on all nodes? > > On Monday, November 17, 2014 12:11:15 PM UTC-8, Christopher Ambler wrote: >> >> Can someone explain to me why, if disk space is not an issue, I don't >> want maximum replication such that every node has every shard? >> >> It seems to me that there would be no real downside here as long as I'm >> not worried about filling up a disk and my updates happen infrequently and >> in a timely manner. >> >> Am I missing the obvious? ;) >> > -- > 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/6e54e3dc-c9f3-4428-977e-fc3f0e64da8d%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/6e54e3dc-c9f3-4428-977e-fc3f0e64da8d%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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/CAF3ZnZmE-nkPFoU%2BgsKFw9r7aL33%3De%2B9qfHMSOJGvmxxsTn2mA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
