Depends on how many nodes you have of course, but if you go for a replica on every node, your write performance will take a hit. So high throughput logging will be difficult.
I see the point though - *if* you have the performance for it and *if* you're not trying to log at huge rates, then there is definitely extra security in a relpica on every node. Is it worth it? Up to you really. We currently have 5 nodes with 2 replicas on every index. This allows us to lose any 2 machines in the cluster and keep our heads above water. This is a reasonable state of affairs for us. Our set up is a bit like a Raid 5 disk array, whereas you are looking at Raid 1. Horses for courses I guess. D On Monday, 17 November 2014 20:11:15 UTC, 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/045403f7-a4fe-44bf-b1c5-88a27d1c01f5%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
