Thanks for reply. I did some early testing and I am getting about 0.7-1.4s
to get results, (that's without any filtering yet), which is still within
acceptable range for me.
I'd still like to hear about people experience with it. It seems this is
very rarely used feature.
On Monday, June 16, 2014 2:19:24 PM UTC+1, Luca Cavanna wrote:
what you describe doesn't sound insane, just make sure you use proper
filtering as much as you can to limit the number of queries you execute
when percolating each document.
Also, with the percolator available since 1.0 you can scale out just by
adding more nodes and have the percolator queries distributed over multiple
shards. That means that if you were to reach the limit of a single shard
you could always scale out.
On Friday, June 13, 2014 5:15:05 PM UTC+2, Maciej Dziardziel wrote:
I wanted to ask those who use percollation: how many queries are you
I need to set up some equivalent of percollation for about 100k queries.
With some filtering
probably up to 10k would actually had to be checked for each new document.
Is the idea of using ES percollations for that insane?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to email@example.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/89f40dd8-9c70-4015-bb69-c127ada8551d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.