# Elastic cloud one 58 GB node vs AWS ES 4 nodes with 8 GB of memory each performance

**URL:** https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532
**Category:** Elasticsearch
**Created:** [May 7, 2020, 12:10pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532 "2020-05-07T12:10:45Z")
**Posts on this page:** 7
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![bogdan\_dd](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/bogdan_dd/32/49123_2.png) [@bogdan\_dd](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/bogdan_dd)
#### Post date: [May 7, 2020, 12:10pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532/1 "2020-05-07T12:10:45Z")

</div>

Hi, I'm planning to use an elastic cloud for my project but I have some confusion about what is the right way to configure my elasticsearch architecture, according to price calculator [https://cloud.elastic.co/pricing](https://cloud.elastic.co/pricing) in order to configure a cluster with 4 data nodes I should buy 4 nodes with 58 GB of memory each but it's way too many resources for my needs which will cost me a lot of money if we take a look at AWS ES there I can buy 4 nodes with 8 GB of memory each, which is perfect for me, with elastic cloud I can't configure such cluster because of a threshold of minimal 58 GB memory.

My question is what solution will be the best in terms of performance and fault tolerance:

1. Set up 4 nodes with 8 GB of memory each on AWS ES and if one node falls down another 3 will make a job (P.S. I understand limitations of AWS ES and they don't bother me)
2. Set up 1 node with 58 GB of memory on elastic cloud but here I don't know what will happen if this node falls down? will my data be transferred to another 58 GB node automatically, which can cause downtime, or I will be waiting for current node recovery?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![dadoonet](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/dadoonet/32/137187_2.png) [@dadoonet](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/dadoonet)
#### Post date: [May 7, 2020, 12:28pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532/2 "2020-05-07T12:28:06Z")

</div>

Welcome!

Why do you think you need 4 nodes?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![bogdan\_dd](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/bogdan_dd/32/49123_2.png) [@bogdan\_dd](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/bogdan_dd)
#### Post date: [May 7, 2020, 12:40pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532/3 "2020-05-07T12:40:57Z")

</div>

[dadoonet](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/dadoonet), We have about 40 GB of data and to split a load and achieve fault tolerance I decided that 4 nodes will be enoughth

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![dadoonet](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/dadoonet/32/137187_2.png) [@dadoonet](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/dadoonet)
#### Post date: [May 7, 2020, 3:22pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532/4 "2020-05-07T15:22:29Z")

</div>

Why not starting smaller and see how much HEAP/nodes you really need?

I mean that IMHO, if the data indexed on disk is 40gb, you can most likely use a single primary shard or 2 to hold the data. Then, 2 shards could fit in few gb of HEAP. I'd start with a cloud instance of 4gb, test and if it does not work, increase to 8gb (4gb of HEAP)...

Then, I'd probably use 2 zones. So something like:

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/3X/4/4/447ec2d9a7927c0ac71d1a3bac30c0256e9f7c89.png)

Not sure if you need more than that. "It depends" of course. As usual...  
What is your use case typically?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![bogdan\_dd](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/bogdan_dd/32/49123_2.png) [@bogdan\_dd](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/bogdan_dd)
#### Post date: [May 7, 2020, 4:00pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532/5 "2020-05-07T16:00:35Z")

</div>

> [@dadoonet](#):
>
> I mean that IMHO, if the data indexed on disk is 40gb, you can most likely use a single primary shard or 2 to hold the data. Then, 2 shards could fit in few gb of HEAP. I'd start with a cloud instance of 4gb, test and if it does not work, increase to 8gb (4gb of HEAP)...
> 
> Then, I'd probably use 2 zones

I think you are right here. One question I would like to clarify is if I choose to set up an elastic cloud on AWS will I be charged for data transfer between aws rds, s3, dynamodb and elastic cloud? If my AWS resources located in the same region as an elastic cloud then I shouldn't but I may be wrong.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![dadoonet](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/dadoonet/32/137187_2.png) [@dadoonet](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/dadoonet)
#### Post date: [May 7, 2020, 4:43pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532/6 "2020-05-07T16:43:41Z")

</div>

I honestly don't know. May be create a free trial account on [cloud.elastic.co](http://cloud.elastic.co) and ask the support? Unless @uricohen knows?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/3X/1/a/1ac57faf039f6b580b3f104ef42a2a89e41014de.png) [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)
#### Post date: [June 4, 2020, 4:43pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elastic-cloud-one-58-gb-node-vs-aws-es-4-nodes-with-8-gb-of-memory-each-performance/231532/7 "2020-06-04T16:43:45Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
