# UnavailableShardsException When Creating Index With Settings **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [April 25, 2011, 11:18pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/unavailableshardsexception-when-creating-index-with-settings/4291 "2011-04-25T23:18:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![timscott](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/timscott/32/3220_2.png) [@timscott](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/timscott)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2011, 11:18pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/unavailableshardsexception-when-creating-index-with-settings/4291/1 "2011-04-25T23:18:23Z")
In 0.16 when you create an index with settings, you can't PUT to it. You get UnavailableShardsException. > ---
**Author:** ![kimchy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/kimchy/32/44952_2.png) [@kimchy](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/kimchy)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2011, 5:50pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/unavailableshardsexception-when-creating-index-with-settings/4291/2 "2011-04-26T17:50:38Z")
I am guessing you are starting a single node, in which case, this failure is expected. Since you create an index with 2 replicas per shard, on a single node, then there aren't enough shards available for write operation. See here: [Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/api/index_.html) (under write consistency). If you use a single node, then creating an index with 0 replicas, or 1 replica, is good enough. You can always use the update settings API to increase the number of replicas if you add more nodes (or just let the shards rebalance themselves). On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Tim Scott wrote: > In 0.16 when you create an index with settings, you can't PUT to it. > You get UnavailableShardsException. > > [https://gist.github.com/941463](https://gist.github.com/941463) ---
**Author:** ![timscott](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/timscott/32/3220_2.png) [@timscott](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/timscott)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2011, 8:53pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/unavailableshardsexception-when-creating-index-with-settings/4291/3 "2011-04-30T20:53:31Z")
Still trying to get my brain around shards and replicas. Maybe you (or anyone) would be kind enough to offer opinions??? Here are the basics of my application. It's multi-tennant. It's just getting started, and we have very few users. Each user has his own index. I currently have one small EC2 server dedicated to ES. We hope to grow to thousands and eventually hundreds of thousands of users. No single user will be too big. The average user might grow to say 5k - 50k documents after a while. Large users might have 100k documents but rarely much more. No one user will have very heavy usage. Documents will come in one at a time or in small batches. Searches by any one user will be mostly occasional. Does this set of facts point clearly to any shard/replica strategy? Anything I didn't mention that would lead me in one way or another? Thanks very much in advance. On Apr 26, 12:50 pm, Shay Banon [shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com](mailto:shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com) wrote: > I am guessing you are starting a single node, in which case, this failure is expected. Since you create an index with 2 replicas per shard, on a single node, then there aren't enough shards available for write operation. See here:[Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/api/index_.html)(under write consistency). > > If you use a single node, then creating an index with 0 replicas, or 1 replica, is good enough. You can always use the update settings API to increase the number of replicas if you add more nodes (or just let the shards rebalance themselves). > > On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Tim Scott wrote: > > > In 0.16 when you create an index with settings, you can't PUT to it. > > You get UnavailableShardsException. > > > [gist:941463 · GitHub](https://gist.github.com/941463) ---
**Author:** ![kimchy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/kimchy/32/44952_2.png) [@kimchy](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/kimchy)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2011, 7:19am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/unavailableshardsexception-when-creating-index-with-settings/4291/4 "2011-05-01T07:19:21Z")
If you are going to have such a small number of users, then having 1 shard for an index is enough in terms of index capacity. Replicas are there to provide two functions, first, is high availability, the second is more scale when it comes to search. So, it up to you, 1 replica should be enough. Going back to your design, in such a usecase I would go with a different design. I would create a single index with 10-20 shards, and 1 replica. I would use routing based on the username/userid to control indexing and search operation (when searching, also filter based on the user name) per user (faster). This is for a simple reason that a single index per user, even with a single shard, comes with an overhead. The proposed solution will result in much smaller overhead. -shay.banon On Saturday, April 30, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Tim Scott wrote: > Still trying to get my brain around shards and replicas. > > Maybe you (or anyone) would be kind enough to offer opinions??? > > Here are the basics of my application. It's multi-tennant. It's just > getting started, and we have very few users. Each user has his own > index. I currently have one small EC2 server dedicated to ES. We > hope to grow to thousands and eventually hundreds of thousands of > users. No single user will be too big. The average user might grow > to say 5k - 50k documents after a while. Large users might have 100k > documents but rarely much more. No one user will have very heavy > usage. Documents will come in one at a time or in small batches. > Searches by any one user will be mostly occasional. > > Does this set of facts point clearly to any shard/replica strategy? > Anything I didn't mention that would lead me in one way or another? > Thanks very much in advance. > > On Apr 26, 12:50 pm, Shay Banon [shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com](mailto:shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com) wrote: > > > I am guessing you are starting a single node, in which case, this failure is expected. Since you create an index with 2 replicas per shard, on a single node, then there aren't enough shards available for write operation. See here:[Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/api/index_.html)(under write consistency). > > > > If you use a single node, then creating an index with 0 replicas, or 1 replica, is good enough. You can always use the update settings API to increase the number of replicas if you add more nodes (or just let the shards rebalance themselves). > > > > On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Tim Scott wrote: > > > > > In 0.16 when you create an index with settings, you can't PUT to it. > > > You get UnavailableShardsException. > > > > > [gist:941463 · GitHub](https://gist.github.com/941463) ---
**Author:** ![timscott](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/timscott/32/3220_2.png) [@timscott](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/timscott)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2011, 9:23pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/unavailableshardsexception-when-creating-index-with-settings/4291/5 "2011-05-01T21:23:12Z")
Thanks very much for your thoughtful advice. One question. Each tenant us is storing sensitive information, and it's absolutely critical that one tenant never accesses another's information. I'm not sure why, but it seems to me that index-per-tenant provides some level of isolation that would enhance security. Is there anything to that thought? On May 1, 2:19 am, Shay Banon [shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com](mailto:shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com) wrote: > If you are going to have such a small number of users, then having 1 shard for an index is enough in terms of index capacity. Replicas are there to provide two functions, first, is high availability, the second is more scale when it comes to search. So, it up to you, 1 replica should be enough. > > Going back to your design, in such a usecase I would go with a different design. I would create a single index with 10-20 shards, and 1 replica. I would use routing based on the username/userid to control indexing and search operation (when searching, also filter based on the user name) per user (faster). This is for a simple reason that a single index per user, even with a single shard, comes with an overhead. The proposed solution will result in much smaller overhead. > > -shay.banon > > On Saturday, April 30, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Tim Scott wrote: > > > Still trying to get my brain around shards and replicas. > > > Maybe you (or anyone) would be kind enough to offer opinions??? > > > Here are the basics of my application. It's multi-tennant. It's just > > getting started, and we have very few users. Each user has his own > > index. I currently have one small EC2 server dedicated to ES. We > > hope to grow to thousands and eventually hundreds of thousands of > > users. No single user will be too big. The average user might grow > > to say 5k - 50k documents after a while. Large users might have 100k > > documents but rarely much more. No one user will have very heavy > > usage. Documents will come in one at a time or in small batches. > > Searches by any one user will be mostly occasional. > > > Does this set of facts point clearly to any shard/replica strategy? > > Anything I didn't mention that would lead me in one way or another? > > Thanks very much in advance. > > > On Apr 26, 12:50 pm, Shay Banon [shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com](mailto:shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com) wrote: > > > > > I am guessing you are starting a single node, in which case, this failure is expected. Since you create an index with 2 replicas per shard, on a single node, then there aren't enough shards available for write operation. See here:[Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/api/index_.html)(underwrite consistency). > > > > If you use a single node, then creating an index with 0 replicas, or 1 replica, is good enough. You can always use the update settings API to increase the number of replicas if you add more nodes (or just let the shards rebalance themselves). > > > > On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Tim Scott wrote: > > > > > > > In 0.16 when you create an index with settings, you can't PUT to it. > > > > You get UnavailableShardsException. > > > > > [gist:941463 · GitHub](https://gist.github.com/941463) ---
**Author:** ![kimchy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/kimchy/32/44952_2.png) [@kimchy](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/kimchy)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2011, 12:20pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/unavailableshardsexception-when-creating-index-with-settings/4291/6 "2011-05-02T12:20:11Z")
It does provide better isolation, but, if you make sure you filter based on the username each time you execute a search request, then it will be as safe. On Monday, May 2, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Tim Scott wrote: > Thanks very much for your thoughtful advice. One question. Each > tenant us is storing sensitive information, and it's absolutely > critical that one tenant never accesses another's information. I'm > not sure why, but it seems to me that index-per-tenant provides some > level of isolation that would enhance security. Is there anything to > that thought? > > On May 1, 2:19 am, Shay Banon [shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com](mailto:shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com) wrote: > > > If you are going to have such a small number of users, then having 1 shard for an index is enough in terms of index capacity. Replicas are there to provide two functions, first, is high availability, the second is more scale when it comes to search. So, it up to you, 1 replica should be enough. > > > > Going back to your design, in such a usecase I would go with a different design. I would create a single index with 10-20 shards, and 1 replica. I would use routing based on the username/userid to control indexing and search operation (when searching, also filter based on the user name) per user (faster). This is for a simple reason that a single index per user, even with a single shard, comes with an overhead. The proposed solution will result in much smaller overhead. > > > > -shay.banon > > > > On Saturday, April 30, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Tim Scott wrote: > > > > > Still trying to get my brain around shards and replicas. > > > > > Maybe you (or anyone) would be kind enough to offer opinions??? > > > > > Here are the basics of my application. It's multi-tennant. It's just > > > getting started, and we have very few users. Each user has his own > > > index. I currently have one small EC2 server dedicated to ES. We > > > hope to grow to thousands and eventually hundreds of thousands of > > > users. No single user will be too big. The average user might grow > > > to say 5k - 50k documents after a while. Large users might have 100k > > > documents but rarely much more. No one user will have very heavy > > > usage. Documents will come in one at a time or in small batches. > > > Searches by any one user will be mostly occasional. > > > > > Does this set of facts point clearly to any shard/replica strategy? > > > Anything I didn't mention that would lead me in one way or another? > > > Thanks very much in advance. > > > > > On Apr 26, 12:50 pm, Shay Banon [shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com](mailto:shay.ba...@elasticsearch.com) wrote: > > > > > > > I am guessing you are starting a single node, in which case, this failure is expected. Since you create an index with 2 replicas per shard, on a single node, then there aren't enough shards available for write operation. See here:[Elasticsearch Platform — Find real-time answers at scale | Elastic](http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/api/index_.html)(underwrite consistency). > > > > > > If you use a single node, then creating an index with 0 replicas, or 1 replica, is good enough. You can always use the update settings API to increase the number of replicas if you add more nodes (or just let the shards rebalance themselves). > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 26, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Tim Scott wrote: > > > > > > > > > In 0.16 when you create an index with settings, you can't PUT to it. > > > > > You get UnavailableShardsException. > > > > > > > [https://gist.github.com/941463](https://gist.github.com/941463) ---
**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, 4:07am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/unavailableshardsexception-when-creating-index-with-settings/4291/7 "2017-07-06T04:07:09Z")