# Re: Cluster metadata (bulk indexing terabytes of time-based data)

**URL:** <https://discuss.elastic.co/t/re-cluster-metadata-bulk-indexing-terabytes-of-time-based-data/6457>\
**Category:** Elasticsearch\
**Created:** [January 20, 2012, 9:25pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/re-cluster-metadata-bulk-indexing-terabytes-of-time-based-data/6457 "2012-01-20T21:25:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Berkay\_Mollamustafao](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Berkay\_Mollamustafao](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Berkay_Mollamustafao)\
**Post date:** [January 20, 2012, 9:25pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/re-cluster-metadata-bulk-indexing-terabytes-of-time-based-data/6457/1 "2012-01-20T21:25:39Z")

</div>

No, what I'm saying is that you can have multiple EBS volumes attached to  
the EC2 node, and stripe them to have a single volume. This is often done  
to for increased I/O.  
So you'd run a single ES instance on the server, put all the data on the  
striped EBS volume you've created. If the node fails, you have the data on  
EBS, you can start a new EC2 instance, attach the EBS volumes, and you'd be  
good to go.

By the way, I think this email jumped threads 🙂

Regards,  
Berkay Mollamustafaoglu  
mberkay on yahoo, google and skype

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Derrick [derrickrburns@gmail.com](mailto:derrickrburns@gmail.com) wrote:

> To be clear, are you suggesting one EBS volume per elasticsearch index? I  
> could end up with hundreds of small volumes, correct? Wouldn't I need to  
> run one ES node per volume?

---

<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, 3:41am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/re-cluster-metadata-bulk-indexing-terabytes-of-time-based-data/6457/2 "2017-07-06T03:41:56Z")

</div>