We are experimenting with Elastic Search deployed in Azure Container Instances
(Debian + OpenJDK). The ES indexes are stored into an Azure file share mounted
via SMB (3.0). The Elastic Search cluster is made up of 4 nodes, each one have
a separate file share to store the indices.
This configur
need to change
> that setting even with larger clusters.
>
> Uwe
>
> Am 02.01.2023 um 11:18 schrieb S S:
>> We are experimenting with Elastic Search deployed in Azure Container
>> Instances (Debian + OpenJDK). The ES indexes are stored into an Azure file
>> sha
> documentation is not mandatory and misleading.
>
> If you use newest version of Elasticsearch with Java 19 and you use
> `--enable-preview` in you jvm.properties file, you don't even need to change
> that setting even with larger clusters.
>
> Uwe
>
> Am 02.01.
> But in general, you can simply use MMapDirectory, the max-map-count setting
> is only relevant in *huge* (huge means hundreds of huge indexes per node). In
> that case Java 19's preview features would be recommended.
>
> Uwe
>
> Am 02.01.2023 um 17:41 schrieb S S
eneral, you can simply use MMapDirectory, the max-map-count setting
> is only relevant in *huge* (huge means hundreds of huge indexes per node). In
> that case Java 19's preview features would be recommended.
>
> Uwe
>
> Am 02.01.2023 um 17:41 schrieb S S:
>> H
I can try?
Many thanks,
Seb
> On 2 Jan 2023, at 17:55, S S wrote:
>
> Thank you Uwe, this is great! I am rebuilding the cluster using MMapDirectory
> and no enable-preview, as you suggested. Let’s see what happens.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Seb
>
>> On 2 Jan 202
w >1 GiB (but < 5 GiB) chunks (so lets assume 90 mappings needed for a
> shard), so you could have approx 728 shards per node. Sorry raising this
> setting is not needed!
>
> Uwe
>
> Am 02.01.2023 um 18:24 schrieb S S:
>> I also tried enabling preview but no joy, sa
not have implemented
> it correctly in Linux kernel.
>
> This is the reason for the recommendation to not use network file systems.
> You're example just confirmed this recommendation.
>
> Uwe
>
> Am 02.01.2023 um 19:24 schrieb S S:
>> Hi Uwe,
>>
>>
