# Elasticsearch 0.17.4 index uses a lot more disk than 0.16.5?

**URL:** <https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elasticsearch-0-17-4-index-uses-a-lot-more-disk-than-0-16-5/5128>\
**Category:** Elasticsearch\
**Created:** [August 11, 2011, 3:48pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elasticsearch-0-17-4-index-uses-a-lot-more-disk-than-0-16-5/5128 "2011-08-11T15:48:44Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jamshid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecd19e/32.png) [@Jamshid](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Jamshid)\
**Post date:** [August 11, 2011, 3:48pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elasticsearch-0-17-4-index-uses-a-lot-more-disk-than-0-16-5/5128/1 "2011-08-11T15:48:44Z")

</div>

Hi, I upgraded from 0.16.5 to current 0.17.4 so I could use  
lowercase\_expanded\_terms in a uri request:

curl -i '[http://localhost:9200/\_search](http://localhost:9200/_search)?  
pretty=yes&default\_operator=AND&lowercase\_expanded\_terms=false&q=context:mybucket  
%20name:Foo/\*'

I recreated my index:

curl -XPUT 'localhost:9200/myindex' -d '{ "mappings" :{ "files" :  
{ "\_source" : { "enabled" : true },"properties" : { "name" :  
{ "type" : "string", "analyzer" : "keyword" }, "context" : { "type" :  
"string", "analyzer" : "keyword" }}}}}'

and repopulated it with 200 million records, and the index size is  
about 80% larger than the same index on 0.16.5. This is both "data"  
disk usage and from node stats.

I don't see anything mentioned in the 0.17.x release notes about index  
size. Is this expected, maybe because of Lucene upgrade?

Thanks,  
Jamshid

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![kimchy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/kimchy/32/44952_2.png) [@kimchy](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/kimchy)\
**Post date:** [August 11, 2011, 4:55pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elasticsearch-0-17-4-index-uses-a-lot-more-disk-than-0-16-5/5128/2 "2011-08-11T16:55:08Z")

</div>

This is probably because of failing to clean the transaction logs properly.  
The fix for it was not full in 0.17.4, and will be part of 0.17.5 (will be  
released today).

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Jamshid [jamshid69@gmail.com](mailto:jamshid69@gmail.com) wrote:

> Hi, I upgraded from 0.16.5 to current 0.17.4 so I could use  
> lowercase\_expanded\_terms in a uri request:
> 
> curl -i '[http://localhost:9200/\_search](http://localhost:9200/_search)?
> 
> pretty=yes&default\_operator=AND&lowercase\_expanded\_terms=false&q=context:mybucket  
> %20name:Foo/\*'
> 
> I recreated my index:
> 
> curl -XPUT 'localhost:9200/myindex' -d '{ "mappings" :{ "files" :  
> { "\_source" : { "enabled" : true },"properties" : { "name" :  
> { "type" : "string", "analyzer" : "keyword" }, "context" : { "type" :  
> "string", "analyzer" : "keyword" }}}}}'
> 
> and repopulated it with 200 million records, and the index size is  
> about 80% larger than the same index on 0.16.5. This is both "data"  
> disk usage and from node stats.
> 
> I don't see anything mentioned in the 0.17.x release notes about index  
> size. Is this expected, maybe because of Lucene upgrade?
> 
> Thanks,  
> Jamshid

---

<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:** [July 6, 2017, 3:57am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/elasticsearch-0-17-4-index-uses-a-lot-more-disk-than-0-16-5/5128/3 "2017-07-06T03:57:26Z")

</div>

Closed on July 6, 2017, 3:57am UTC