# Shrink shards not respecting node settings 7.10.0

**URL:** <https://discuss.elastic.co/t/shrink-shards-not-respecting-node-settings-7-10-0/262883>\
**Category:** Elasticsearch\
**Created:** [February 1, 2021, 6:25pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/shrink-shards-not-respecting-node-settings-7-10-0/262883 "2021-02-01T18:25:53Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nz-1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/nz-1/32/76864_2.png) [@nz-1](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/nz-1)\
**Post date:** [February 1, 2021, 6:25pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/shrink-shards-not-respecting-node-settings-7-10-0/262883/1 "2021-02-01T18:25:53Z")

</div>

I have a 5 node cluster with 4 nodes as the data\_warm, data\_hot and 1 node as the cold storage.  
When ES goes to shrink the node I see on some of the indexes it chooses the cold storage node (dx6MirFmT2y9AdXEF02pDw) which causes a conflict, since the tier\_prefence cannot be matched with the required node.

```
    "allocation": {
      "include": {
        "_tier_preference": "data_warm,data_hot"
      },
      "require": {
        "_id": "dx6MirFmT2y9AdXEF02pDw"
      }
    }

```

The node settings (id dx6MirFmT2y9AdXEF02pDw)

```
    "node" : {
      "attr" : {
        "temperature" : "cold",
        "transform" : {
          "node" : "false"
        },
        "xpack" : {
          "installed" : "true"
        }
      },
      "name" : "es05",
      "roles" : "data_cold"
    },

```

ILP Error

```
Waiting for node [dx6MirFmT2y9AdXEF02pDw] to contain [3] shards, found [0], remaining [3]

```

From GET /\_cluster/allocation/explain?include\_yes\_decisions

```
    {
      "decider" : "filter",
      "decision" : "NO",
      "explanation" : """node does not match index setting [index.routing.allocation.require] filters [_id:"dx6MirFmT2y9AdXEF02pDw"]"""
    },

```

If I manually update the node settings to pick a different node then everything just starts working,  
(this is not a permament solution)

```
{
"settings": {
  "index.routing.allocation.require._id": "wC6YgmrPQPqDqiDHqYjTAQ"
}
}

```

Is there a flaw in the shrink allocation, causing it to pick an invalid node?

thanks  
nz

---

<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:** [February 8, 2021, 4:49am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/shrink-shards-not-respecting-node-settings-7-10-0/262883/2 "2021-02-08T04:49:44Z")

</div>

Welcome to our community! 😃

Can you your share your ILM policy?

---

<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:** [March 8, 2021, 4:50am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/shrink-shards-not-respecting-node-settings-7-10-0/262883/3 "2021-03-08T04:50:24Z")

</div>

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