Yes, the fake indexes contain no data. I add an extra field to each filter
which give me information on what matched and where to store it. That
works out well for a multi-tenant operation where there may be overlap in
What do you mean by fake indices? You mean they hold no data except for
percolating against them? Thats fine, they are still your "compute" power
for percolation (and sometimes, they also hold data).
Note, once a shard for an index (not the _percolate index, the one you
register the query against) exists on a node, then it will make use of that
node. The percolation action can be executed concurrently on the same
shard. And yes, adding more nodes will mean better performance.
With percolation, if you have "fake" indices as you mentioned, then its
good enough to have a single shard of those fake indices, and 0-all for the
replicas. This will mean that automatically, as you add nodes, those
replicas will expand to make use of the new node, and will also service
Still, not to be confused with the _percolate index, which only acts as
persistent storage for the percolated queries, and needs to be 0-all so it
will exists on all nodes.
On Sunday, February 5, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kenneth Loafman wrote:
As it turns out the indexes are fake ('filters' and 'excludes') with the
same mapping as the other indexes and these reside on the percolator
cluster, so my solution worked, but for a different reason than I thought.
They are also 1 shard, 0-all replicas. So I guess the only way to
increase the number of filters and excludes indexes is to add nodes, if I
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Shay Banon firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
The comment is meant to say that increasing the number of replicas for
the actual index (not _percoalte, which just acts as the storage to the
registered queries) will increase percolation performance. The _percolate
index should not change, and should always be 1 shard with 0-all replicas
(so it will be spread across the nodes storage wise, and all nodes will be
able to read the queries registered).
On Friday, February 3, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Kenneth Loafman wrote:
I gave up on my previous question about 0-all being answered, but I'm
still having troubles with expanding the number of replicas for _percolator.
I'm running 18.6 on 3 nodes, strictly for percolator use. Per the
increasing the number of replicas will increase the number of percolation
but I'm having trouble getting the number of replicas to increase. I
played with the script in the gist below, but the results are the same,
every time. The cluster is showing unassigned shards and they never get
initialized. Please help.