You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Also, internally we use scope: node, so I'm wondering if we should make that the recommended configuration.
I'm just guessing, but I think the original scope: cluster + non-master recommendation was made with the idea that we would try not to burden the master with monitoring info.
But the non-master would have to retrieve cluster information from the master internally to satisfy the request either way.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
But the non-master would have to retrieve cluster information from the master internally to satisfy the request either way.
This is not correct. Most stats requests are peer-to-peer things that do not need to involve the master node, and for the ones which do involve the master node in some way we typically find ways to streamline that involvement in newer versions (see e.g. elastic/elasticsearch#101805). Even offloading the JSON rendering to other nodes can be valuable in large enough clusters.
Also, internally we use scope: node, so I'm wondering if we should make that the recommended configuration.
While I agree that we should internally use the configuration we recommend to others, we can solve that by either changing the recommendation or by changing the configuration we use internally. This isn't the place to discuss that, but ask me privately if you'd like more context :)
TLDR the recommendation to avoid sending stats requests to dedicated master nodes is as valid today as ever.
As called out on this forum post the configuring-metricbeat doc for elasticsearch is quite confusing.
scope: cluster
Also, internally we use
scope: node
, so I'm wondering if we should make that the recommended configuration.I'm just guessing, but I think the original
scope: cluster
+ non-master recommendation was made with the idea that we would try not to burden the master with monitoring info.But the non-master would have to retrieve cluster information from the master internally to satisfy the request either way.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: