# Mapping Type removal - Study of alternatives

**URL:** <https://discuss.elastic.co/t/mapping-type-removal-study-of-alternatives/102956>\
**Category:** Elasticsearch\
**Created:** [October 6, 2017, 6:59am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/mapping-type-removal-study-of-alternatives/102956 "2017-10-06T06:59:14Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pokaleshrey](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/pokaleshrey/32/48680_2.png) [@pokaleshrey](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/pokaleshrey)\
**Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 6:59am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/mapping-type-removal-study-of-alternatives/102956/1 "2017-10-06T06:59:14Z")

</div>

Recently, i found that the mapping types will be removed once v6.0 is released.

I would like to know the thoughts on suggested alternatives:

1. **Create index per type** - I have around 30types. So indexes created will be 30. _Does ES perform better while searching multiple indices ?_ In the past i have been reading posts where people suggest on keeping the number to indices to minimum for better search.

2. **Single index, but a "type" field to differentiate the type** - It would be a bit difficult to visualize data esp. in HEAD plugin or any like software. _Will this approach perform better while search than the #1 above ?_

**Misc query:**  
What will be the impact on indexing performance on both above alternatives ?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [October 6, 2017, 7:08am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/mapping-type-removal-study-of-alternatives/102956/2 "2017-10-06T07:08:21Z")

</div>

Do not do #2 if the data types are distinctly different.

If you have groupings of messages, ie metrics, logs from application X, nginx logs, etc etc, then you can group those in a single index.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pokaleshrey](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/pokaleshrey/32/48680_2.png) [@pokaleshrey](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/pokaleshrey)\
**Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 8:10am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/mapping-type-removal-study-of-alternatives/102956/3 "2017-10-06T08:10:58Z")

</div>

Thanks Mark. My documents are almost similar for the types. Just a field here and there.  
I have a case perfectly suited for Nested type. But due to indexing performance issues & searching simplicity, we have created different types and the data is repeated for documents.

---

<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:** [November 3, 2017, 8:11am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/mapping-type-removal-study-of-alternatives/102956/4 "2017-11-03T08:11:31Z")

</div>

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