6 ms·
That's an insane number of shards, you should be closer to 500 for that amount of data and only 6 nodes.
by parliament32 7y ago
That's an insane number of shards, you should be closer to 500 for that amount of data and only 6 nodes.
- tedk-42 7y agoIt's due to the number of indicies/indexes stored from our various data sources. Yours and another poster's comments are interesting so we might look at ways we can reduce the shard count given the new info on overhead.