Exactly, with 3 nodes, the error will be gone.

Please, always use an odd number of data nodes, in particular with replica
> 0, in order not to confuse ES quorum formula, and also to avoid split
brains with minimun_master_nodes

Jörg

On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Tom <[email protected]> wrote:

> Also, we have another cluster (for different purposes) that has 3 nodes
> but we didn't experience such errors with it (for this ES we create indices
> on a daily basis).
>
> El jueves, 8 de enero de 2015, 16:23:12 (UTC-3), Tom escribió:
>
>> 4
>>
>> El jueves, 8 de enero de 2015 16:19:50 UTC-3, Jörg Prante escribió:
>>>
>>> How many nodes do you have in the cluster?
>>>
>>> Jörg
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:57 PM, Tom <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi, we'd been using ES for a while now. Specifically version 0.90.3. A
>>>> couple of months ago we decided to migrate to the latest version which was
>>>> finally frozen to be 1.4.1. No data migration was necessary because we have
>>>> a redundant MongoDB, but yesterday we enabled data writing to the new ES
>>>> cluster. All was running smoothly when we noticed that at o'clock times
>>>> there were bursts of four or five log messages of the following kinds:
>>>>
>>>> Error indexing None into index ind-analytics-2015.01.08. Total elapsed
>>>> time: 1065 ms. org.elasticsearch.cluster.metadata.
>>>> ProcessClusterEventTimeoutException: failed to process cluster event
>>>> (acquire index lock) within 1s
>>>> at org.elasticsearch.cluster.metadata.MetaDataCreateIndexService$1.run(
>>>> MetaDataCreateIndexService.java:148) ~[org.elasticsearch.
>>>> elasticsearch-1.4.1.jar:na]
>>>> at 
>>>> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
>>>> ~[na:1.7.0_17]
>>>> at 
>>>> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
>>>> ~[na:1.7.0_17]
>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:722) ~[na:1.7.0_17]
>>>>
>>>> [ForkJoinPool-2-worker-15] c.d.i.p.ActorScatterGatherStrategy -
>>>> Scattering to failed in 1043ms 
>>>> org.elasticsearch.action.UnavailableShardsException:
>>>> [ind-2015.01.08.00][0] Not enough active copies to meet write consistency
>>>> of [QUORUM] (have 1, needed 2). Timeout: [1s], request: index
>>>> {[ind-2015.01.08.00][search][...]}
>>>> at org.elasticsearch.action.support.replication.
>>>> TransportShardReplicationOperationAction$AsyncShardOperationAction.
>>>> retryBecauseUnavailable(TransportShardReplicationOperationAction.java:784)
>>>> ~[org.elasticsearch.elasticsearch-1.4.1.jar:na]
>>>> at org.elasticsearch.action.support.replication.
>>>> TransportShardReplicationOperationAction$AsyncShardOperationAction.
>>>> raiseFailureIfHaveNotEnoughActiveShardCopies(
>>>> TransportShardReplicationOperationAction.java:776) ~[org.elasticsearch.
>>>> elasticsearch-1.4.1.jar:na]
>>>> at org.elasticsearch.action.support.replication.
>>>> TransportShardReplicationOperationAction$AsyncShardOperationAction.
>>>> performOnPrimary(TransportShardReplicationOperationAction.java:507)
>>>> ~[org.elasticsearch.elasticsearch-1.4.1.jar:na]
>>>> at org.elasticsearch.action.support.replication.
>>>> TransportShardReplicationOperationAction$AsyncShardOperationAction$1.
>>>> run(TransportShardReplicationOperationAction.java:419)
>>>> ~[org.elasticsearch.elasticsearch-1.4.1.jar:na]
>>>> at 
>>>> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
>>>> ~[na:1.7.0_17]
>>>> at 
>>>> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
>>>> ~[na:1.7.0_17]
>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:722) ~[na:1.7.0_17]
>>>>
>>>> This occurs at o'clock times because we write over hour-based indices.
>>>> For example, all writes from 18:00:00 to 18:59:59 of 01/08 goes to
>>>> ind-2015.01.08.18. At 19:00:00 all writes will go to ind-2015.01.08.19, and
>>>> so on.
>>>>
>>>> With 0.90.3 version of ES, automatic index creation was working
>>>> flawlessly (with no complaints) but the new version doesn't seem to handle
>>>> that feature very well. It looks like, when all those concurrent writes
>>>> competes to be the first to create the index, all but one fails. Of course
>>>> we could just create such indices manually to avoid this situation
>>>> altogether, but this would only be a workaround for a feature that
>>>> previously worked.
>>>>
>>>> Also, we use ES through the native Java client and the configuration
>>>> for all our indices is
>>>>
>>>> settings = {
>>>>   number_of_shards = 5,
>>>>   number_of_replicas = 2
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>> Tom;
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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/4deefb09-bed1-499a-b9fc-3ed4d78fc4c0%
>>>> 40googlegroups.com
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/4deefb09-bed1-499a-b9fc-3ed4d78fc4c0%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/4b052ab5-ab02-49bb-ad79-8e47f249e755%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/4b052ab5-ab02-49bb-ad79-8e47f249e755%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/CAKdsXoFaU96UN8YaguRs%2BMqD%2BtgypEWd6LP0CrisyFhh%2BTzjKw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to