Ah, that's interesting. Any overheads doing this rather than the adding a
I guess this will make searches quick as by using the type you're
Thanks Paul and Clint!
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Paul email@example.com wrote:
Another thought (and apologies for confusing the conversation by
adding another Paul), if you need per user mapping is to have a single
index w/ as many shards as needed, and each user can be their own
document type, as mappings are defined per document type.
On Aug 11, 9:54 am, Clinton Gormley clin...@iannounce.co.uk wrote:
Don't forget that each shard is a Lucene instance, so if you
million users, you will need a LOT of boxes and memory to cope
Hmm... so are per user indexes not a good idea? We are expecting lots
of users. Will ES definitely keep an instance running for each index
even if that index has not been written to or read from for a while?
"not a good idea" depends on your application, really, but you say that
you will have lots of users, so:
My understanding is that yes, at least one primary shard must be alive
for each index. I say "at least one" although by default you would have
more than one. (you can specify this at index creation time)
Why not just store a user_id in each document that needs to be filtered
by user? It will be way more efficient.
http://justgiving.com/thetrafalgarway - 300 miles, 2 bicycles, 36 hours