# CPU utilization has been increased by 40% in ES 2.1.1 when compared with ES 1.6 **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [February 26, 2016, 4:43am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808 "2016-02-26T04:43:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![anjith.p](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a3d4f5/32.png) [@anjith.p](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/anjith.p)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2016, 4:43am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808/1 "2016-02-26T04:43:55Z")
We have observed that the CPU utilization in 2.1.1(while indexing is in progress) is 40% more compared with 1.6;we have made sure that the dataset is same in both the cases. A quick profiling has pointed out that ES bulk index threads are taking a lot of time. I've added the relevant screen shots to this thread. Our primary assumption is that writing doc\_values could be the suspect as now they are enabled by default in 2.1.1 contrary to 1.6. Please let me know if anyone else has observed this issue. ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/2X/d/dddfa20f9701e65df88320437ce715ac094b91b3.png) ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/2X/0/0e7954475e6c343ae701c4da02877091bf37f661.png) ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/2X/b/ba177a44c5ca1a64da3f45132cdcc98ace921e66.png) ---
**Author:** ![warkolm](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/warkolm/32/39224_2.png) [@warkolm](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/warkolm)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2016, 6:40am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808/2 "2016-02-26T06:40:53Z")
What type of data is it? ---
**Author:** ![anjith.p](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a3d4f5/32.png) [@anjith.p](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/anjith.p)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2016, 7:15am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808/3 "2016-02-26T07:15:50Z")
It is log data in JSON format. ---
**Author:** ![warkolm](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/warkolm/32/39224_2.png) [@warkolm](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/warkolm)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2016, 3:48am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808/4 "2016-03-01T03:48:03Z")
Is the node the same specs between 1.6 and 2.1? ---
**Author:** ![anjith.p](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a3d4f5/32.png) [@anjith.p](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/anjith.p)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2016, 6:54am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808/5 "2016-03-02T06:54:30Z")
Yes, it is. ---
**Author:** ![anjith.p](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a3d4f5/32.png) [@anjith.p](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/anjith.p)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2016, 10:41am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808/6 "2016-03-04T10:41:11Z")
Any clues on this issue ? Should I create a defect on ES in GitHub? ---
**Author:** ![anjith.p](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a3d4f5/32.png) [@anjith.p](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/anjith.p)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2016, 3:03am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808/7 "2016-05-07T03:03:38Z")
The same problem is reproducible with 2.2 as well. It seems Lucene merge therad is taking a lot of CPU. Any pointers? **Following is the hot threads output:** ::: {Nebulo}{KmYP936jSBe3tWS7Eda5jQ}{\*\*\*}{\*\*\*:9300}{master=false} Hot threads at 2016-05-06T18:59:53.684Z, interval=500ms, busiestThreads=3, ignoreIdleThreads=true: 99.7% (498.4ms out of 500ms) cpu usage by thread 'elasticsearch[Nebulo][[bw-2016-05-06-18-001][5]: Lucene Merge Thread #115]' 2/10 snapshots sharing following 13 elements org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene50.Lucene50PostingsWriter.finishTerm(Lucene50PostingsWriter.java:343) org.apache.lucene.codecs.PushPostingsWriterBase.writeTerm(PushPostingsWriterBase.java:169) org.apache.lucene.codecs.blocktree.BlockTreeTermsWriter$TermsWriter.write(BlockTreeTermsWriter.java:1041) org.apache.lucene.codecs.blocktree.BlockTreeTermsWriter.write(BlockTreeTermsWriter.java:456) org.apache.lucene.codecs.perfield.PerFieldPostingsFormat$FieldsWriter.write(PerFieldPostingsFormat.java:198) org.apache.lucene.codecs.FieldsConsumer.merge(FieldsConsumer.java:105) org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentMerger.mergeTerms(SegmentMerger.java:193) org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentMerger.merge(SegmentMerger.java:95) org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.mergeMiddle(IndexWriter.java:4075) org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.merge(IndexWriter.java:3655) org.apache.lucene.index.ConcurrentMergeScheduler.doMerge(ConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:588) org.elasticsearch.index.engine.ElasticsearchConcurrentMergeScheduler.doMerge(ElasticsearchConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:94) org.apache.lucene.index.ConcurrentMergeScheduler$MergeThread.run(ConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:626) 8/10 snapshots sharing following 9 elements org.apache.lucene.codecs.perfield.PerFieldPostingsFormat$FieldsWriter.write(PerFieldPostingsFormat.java:198) org.apache.lucene.codecs.FieldsConsumer.merge(FieldsConsumer.java:105) org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentMerger.mergeTerms(SegmentMerger.java:193) org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentMerger.merge(SegmentMerger.java:95) org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.mergeMiddle(IndexWriter.java:4075) org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.merge(IndexWriter.java:3655) org.apache.lucene.index.ConcurrentMergeScheduler.doMerge(ConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:588) org.elasticsearch.index.engine.ElasticsearchConcurrentMergeScheduler.doMerge(ElasticsearchConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:94) org.apache.lucene.index.ConcurrentMergeScheduler$MergeThread.run(ConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:626) 84.6% (423.1ms out of 500ms) cpu usage by thread 'elasticsearch[Nebulo][[bw-2016-05-06-18-001][10]: Lucene Merge Thread #115]' 10/10 snapshots sharing following 11 elements org.apache.lucene.codecs.blocktree.BlockTreeTermsWriter$TermsWriter.write(BlockTreeTermsWriter.java:1041) org.apache.lucene.codecs.blocktree.BlockTreeTermsWriter.write(BlockTreeTermsWriter.java:456) org.apache.lucene.codecs.perfield.PerFieldPostingsFormat$FieldsWriter.write(PerFieldPostingsFormat.java:198) org.apache.lucene.codecs.FieldsConsumer.merge(FieldsConsumer.java:105) org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentMerger.mergeTerms(SegmentMerger.java:193) org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentMerger.merge(SegmentMerger.java:95) org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.mergeMiddle(IndexWriter.java:4075) org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.merge(IndexWriter.java:3655) org.apache.lucene.index.ConcurrentMergeScheduler.doMerge(ConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:588) org.elasticsearch.index.engine.ElasticsearchConcurrentMergeScheduler.doMerge(ElasticsearchConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:94) org.apache.lucene.index.ConcurrentMergeScheduler$MergeThread.run(ConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:626) ---
**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/3X/1/a/1ac57faf039f6b580b3f104ef42a2a89e41014de.png) [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2017, 10:53pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/cpu-utilization-has-been-increased-by-40-in-es-2-1-1-when-compared-with-es-1-6/42808/8 "2017-07-05T22:53:14Z")