# Can ES support the modification of the shard role for the ilm history index?
**URL:** https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951
**Category:** Elasticsearch
**Tags:** ilm-index-lifecycle-management
**Created:** [September 15, 2025, 12:41pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951 "2025-09-15T12:41:51Z")
**Posts on this page:** 9
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@EricTowns](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/EricTowns)
#### Post date: [September 15, 2025, 12:41pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/1 "2025-09-15T12:41:51Z")
My ES cluster is currently running out of disk space. The new disks are still being purchased. I want to try my best to preserve my data, so I'm using the method of deleting replicas to cope with the current situation.
The index to be operated on is a historical index managed by ilm, and there will only be query operations, no write operations. If I directly set the copy to 0, it will cause the node disk to become unbalanced. If the operation of modifying the shard role is supported, it would be much more convenient. I just need to evenly distribute the main shard to each node, and then set the copy to 0 to achieve my goal š . Currently, the shard distribution of shards is like thisļ¼
```auto
index shard prirep state docs store ip node
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 0 p STARTED 36475406 116.9gb 10.201.223.142 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.223.142
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 1 p STARTED 36486635 117gb 10.201.223.142 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.223.142
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 2 p STARTED 36451906 116.8gb 10.201.155.68 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.155.68
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 3 p STARTED 36474449 117gb 10.201.155.68 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.155.68
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 4 p STARTED 36483364 117gb 10.201.150.36 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.150.36
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 5 p STARTED 36505509 117.1gb 10.201.150.36 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.150.36
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 0 r STARTED 36475406 116.9gb 10.201.234.192 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.234.192
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 1 r STARTED 36486635 117gb 10.201.234.192 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.234.192
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 2 r STARTED 36451906 116.8gb 10.201.171.69 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.171.69
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 3 r STARTED 36474449 116.9gb 10.201.171.69 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.171.69
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 4 r STARTED 36483364 116.9gb 10.201.139.80 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.139.80
iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017 5 r STARTED 36505509 117.1gb 10.201.139.80 iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes_10.201.139.80
```
---
### Author:  [@Musab\_Dogan](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Musab_Dogan)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2025, 7:57am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/2 "2025-09-16T07:57:34Z")
First thing first:
> You canāt decide which node will hold the primary or replica shard but you can move it manually.
To manually move shards from one node to another you can use [reroute](https://www.elastic.co/docs/api/doc/elasticsearch/operation/operation-cluster-reroute) API call.
```auto
POST /_cluster/reroute?metric=none
{
"commands": [
{
"move": {
"index": "test", "shard": 0,
"from_node": "node1", "to_node": "node2"
}
}
]
}
```
Or If your elasticsearch cluster is accessible by a chrome web browser, you can use [elasticvue](https://elasticvue.com/) and do this operation with the help of a UI.
**As a results, here is my recommendation:**
1. disable the [automatic shard allocation](https://www.elastic.co/docs/reference/elasticsearch/configuration-reference/cluster-level-shard-allocation-routing-settings)s
2. use the elasticvue and re-allocate the primary shards to specific nodes
3. Remove the replica (Be aware of the trade-offs)
4. re-enable the shard allocation
---
### Author:  [@stephenb](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/stephenb)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2025, 8:05pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/3 "2025-09-16T20:05:11Z")
@EricTowns
Perhaps I'm missing something....
If you're saying you are setting replicas to zero.. (dangerous but seems like you understand that. Hopefully you will snapshots)
Why not set The `index.routing.allocation.total_shards_per_node: 1`
This will ensure each node will a maximum of one primary shard for each index...
You did not mention what version you are on, newer versions do a better job of balancing...
Just to drive by thought.
---
### Author:  [@Musab\_Dogan](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Musab_Dogan)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2025, 8:19pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/4 "2025-09-16T20:19:37Z")
Hey @stephenb,
Thanks for the answer.
`index.routing.allocation.total_shards_per_node` is a perfect index-level settings to limit the number of shards per node.
Let me try to clarify the question. The index shards already balanced and all nodes allocated 2 shards from `iwc_aime_dialog_record-2025.06.06-000017` index. Some nodes hold 2 primary and some nodes hold 2 replicas. What @EricTowns asking is ākeeping exactly one primary shard and one replica per nodeā. Unfortunately, Elasticsearch doesnāt have any settings for this logic.
---
### Author:  [@stephenb](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/stephenb)
#### Post date: [September 16, 2025, 10:04pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/5 "2025-09-16T22:04:31Z")
Hi @Musab_Dogan
> What @EricTowns asking is ākeeping exactly one primary shard and one replica per nodeā. Unfortunately, Elasticsearch doesnāt have any settings for this logic.
Well, actually, say you have 3 Primaries and 1 replica, that will equal 6 total shards.
If you have 6 nodes and you set
`index.routing.allocation.total_shards_per_node: 1`
You will end up exactly with 1 primary or 1 replica per node
This is a bit risky if you lose a node because then you will have unallocated shards... so we always set Primary = (Number of nodes/2) -1 so in this case we would do 2 primaries.
Not to go in circles, the OP already said / proposing he set replicas to 0...
> [@EricTowns](#):
>
> If I directly set the copy to 0, it will cause the node disk to become unbalanced. If the operation of modifying the shard role is supported, it would be much more convenient. I just need to evenly distribute the main shard to each node, and then set the copy to 0 to achieve my goa
So this setting
`index.routing.allocation.total_shards_per_node: 1` will still distribute the shards no more than 1 primary.
and We still don't know what version we are working with... which can greatly impact allocation.
Sure you can manual route your shards as you explained, just supplying the options
---
### Author:  [@Musab\_Dogan](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Musab_Dogan)
#### Post date: [September 17, 2025, 9:35am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/6 "2025-09-17T09:35:06Z")
> [@stephenb](#):
>
> Well, actually, say you have 3 Primaries and 1 replica, that will equal 6 total shards.
>
> If you have 6 nodes and you set
> `index.routing.allocation.total_shards_per_node: 1`
>
> You will end up exactly with 1 primary or 1 replica per node
Thanks for the explanation. Yes, thatās correct for an index with 3 primary shards and 1 replica in a 6-node cluster.
**The current shard distribution:**
| Node Name | Primary Shards | Replica Shards |
| --- | --- | --- |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.223.142 | 2 | 0 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.155.68 | 2 | 0 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.150.36 | 2 | 0 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.234.192 | 0 | 2 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.171.69 | 0 | 2 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.139.80 | 0 | 2 |
**The expected shard distribution:**
| Node Name | Primary Shards | Replica Shards |
| --- | --- | --- |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.223.142 | 1 | 1 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.155.68 | 1 | 1 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.150.36 | 1 | 1 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.234.192 | 1 | 1 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.171.69 | 1 | 1 |
| iwc-index-aie21-es-data-nodes\_10.201.139.80 | 1 | 1 |
`index.routing.allocation.total_shards_per_node` settings canāt help if you have 6 primaries and 1 replica.
I believe we are on the same page. @stephenb
---
### Author:  [@EricTowns](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/EricTowns)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2025, 2:00am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/7 "2025-09-18T02:00:10Z")
Yes, this is exactly the effect I want to achieve. I think at present, only the manual reroute shards can achieve this effect. Thank you both for your suggestions. @Musab_Dogan @stephenb
---
### Author:  [@stephenb](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/stephenb)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2025, 3:28am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/8 "2025-09-18T03:28:44Z")
Cool!!
BTW @EricTowns you never mentioned what version you are on...
Please always include that in your questions, Elastic evolves quickly, and releases can have different behaviors.
---
### Author:  [@EricTowns](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/EricTowns)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2025, 4:06am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/can-es-support-the-modification-of-the-shard-role-for-the-ilm-history-index/381951/9 "2025-09-18T04:06:00Z")
Thank you for the reminder. I have remembered.š«” In this case, the ES version I used was 8.7