I am looking at sending my App logs to Elastic (6.x) via FileBeat and Logstash. As mentioned in Configure the Logstash output and recommended elsewhere, it seems that I need add the Date to the Index name. The reason for doing so was that when the time came to delete old data, it was easier to delete an entire Index by date, rather than individual documents. Is this true?
If I should be following this recommendation of adding the Date to the Index Name, I’m curious what additional things I need to do to ensure seamless querying? By this I mean querying esp. in Kibana, for e.g. over the past day which would need to look at today’s index as well as yesterday’s index.
Speaking of querying in Kibana, is there a way of simply working with the base index name without the date stamp i.e. setting it up so that I do not see or have to deal with the date named indexes?
Edit: Kamal raised a good point that I have not provided any information about my cluster and my needs. The following is what I'm working with:
What is your daily data creation/expected count
I'm not sure. I don't expect anything more than a GB of data day, and no more than a couple of 100K documents a day. Since these are logs, I don't expect any updates to the documents once they are created.
Growth rate of the data in the future (1 year - 5 years)
At the moment, I don't see the growth rate to cross a GB a day.
How many teams are using the same cluster apart from yours if there is
any
The cluster would be used (actually queried) by just my team. We are about 5 right now, but I don't see more than 10 users (and that's not concurrent, just over a day or month)
Usage patterns, type of queries used etc.
I'm not sure, but there certainly would not be updates to the data other than deletions
Hardware details
I've not worked this out with management. For most part I expect 3 nodes. Also this is not critical i.e. if we lose all of our logs for some reason, I would not lose sleep over it.
First of all you need to take a step back and understand do you really need multiple index or single one(where you need to filter documents while querying using a date field for a particular date).
Some of questions you must have before you take on such decision
What is your daily data creation/expected count
Growth rate of the data in the future (1 year - 5 years)
How many teams are using the same cluster apart from yours if there is any
Usage patterns, type of queries used etc.
Hardware details
Advantages
In a way, having multiple indexes(with date field as its index name) would be more beneficial.
You can delete the old indexes without affecting new ones.
In case if you have to change the mapping, you can do so with the new index without affecting the old ones. Comparatively less overhead while for single index, you have to reindex all the documents which would take lot more time if size is pretty huge. And if this keeps happening every now and then, you would need to come up with solution where you have to execute such operations at the times of minimal usages. That means, it can harm productivity.
searching using multiple indexes still is convenient.
not really sure but its easier for scaling using multiple indexes.
Disadvantages are:
Additional shards are created for each and every index that can waste some storage space.
Overhead to maintain multiple indexes by monitoring/operations team.
At times can lead to over-creation of indexes.
No mapping changes and less documents insertion(in 100s or few 100s), it'd be better to use single index.
The only way and the only correct way to figure out what's best is to have a cluster that closely resembles the production one with data too resembling to production, try various configurations and see which solution fits best.
Speaking of querying in Kibana, is there a way of simply working with
the base index name without the date stamp i.e. setting it up so that
I do not see or have to deal with the date named indexes?
Yes there is. If you have indexes with names like logs-0001, logs-0002, you can use logs-* as indexname when you query.
Including date in an index name is a very common use case implemened by many Elasticsearch users. It helps with archiving/ purging old indices as you mentioned. You dont need to do anything additionally to be able to query. Setup your index basename as an index pattern for your indices for ex. logstash-* and you can query on that particular index pattern in Kibana.
Related
I'm using ElasticSearch on AWS EC2.
And i want to implement today's popular keyword function in ES.
there is 3 indexes(place, genre, name), and i want see today's popular keyword in name index only.
I tried to use ES slowlog and logstash. but slowlog save logs every shard's log.
(ex)number of shards : 5 then 5 query log saved.
Is there any good and easy way to implement popular keyword in ES?
As far as I know, this is not supported by Elasticsearch and you need to build your own custom solution.
Design you mentioned using the slowlog is not good as you mentioned its on per shard basis, even if you do some more computing and able to merge and relate them to a single search at index level, it would not be good, as
you have to change the slow log configuration and for every index there needs to be a different threshold, you can change it to 0ms, to make sure you get all the search queries in slow logs, but that would take a huge disk space and would not be good for Elasticsearch performance.
You have to do some parsing of slow log in your application and if you do it runtime it would be very costly.
I think you can maintain a distributed cache in your application where you store the top searched keyword like the leaderboard of a multi-player gaming app, which is changing very frequently but in your case, you don't even have to update this cache very frequently. I would not go into much implementation details, but simple Hashmap of search term as key and count as value would solve the issue.
Hope this helps. let me know if you have questions.
I have an ElasticSearch cluster and my system handles events coming from an API.
Each event is a document stored in an index and I create a new index per source (the company calling the API). Sources come and go, so I have new sources every week and most sources become inactive after a few weeks. Each source send between 100k and 10M new events every day.
Right now my indices are named api-events-sourcename
The documents contain a datetime field and most of my queries look like "fetch the data for that source between those dates.
I frequently use Kibana and I have configured a filter that matches all my indices (api-events-*) at once, and I then add terms to filter a specific source and specific days.
My requests can be slow at times and they tend to slow down the ingestion of new data.
Given that workflow, should I see any performance benefits to create an index per source and per day, instead of the index per source only that I use today ?
Are there other easy tricks to avoid putting to much strain on the cluster ?
Thanks!
I have a web app that is used to search and view documents in Elastic Search.
The goal now is to maintain two values.
1. How many times the document was fetched in total (life time views)
2. How many times the document was fetched in last 30 days.
Achieving the first is somewhat possible, but the second one seems to be a very hard problem.
The two values need to be part of the document as they will be used for sorting the results.
What is the best way to achieve this.
To maintain expiring data like that you will need to store each view with its timestamp. I suppose you could store them in an array in the ES document, but you're asking for trouble doing it like that, as the update operation that you'd need to call every time the document is viewed will have to delete and recreate the document (that's how ES does updates), and if two views happen at the same time it will be difficult to make sure they both get stored.
There are two ways to store the views, and make use of them in the query:
Put them in a separate store (could be a different index in ES if you like), and run a cron job or similar every day to update every item in the main index with the number of views from the last thirty days in the view store. Even with a lot of data it should be possible to make this quite efficient, depending on your choice of store for views.
Use the ElasticSearch parent/child datatype to store views in the same index as the main documents, as children. I'm not sure that I'd particularly recommend this approach, but I think it should be possible with aggregations to write a query that sorts primary documents by the number of children (filtered by date). It might be quite slow though.
I doubt there is any other way to do this with current versions of ES, because it doesn't support joining across indices. Either the data must be aggregated in advance onto the document, or it has to be available in the same index.
I was looking through elasticsearch and was noticing that you can create an index and bulk add items. I currently have a series of flat files with 220 million entries. I am working on Logstash to parse and add them to ElasticSearch, but I feel that it existing under 1 index would be rough to query. The row data is nothing more than 1-3 properties at most.
How does Elasticsearch function in this case? In order to effectively query this index, do you just add additional instances to the cluster and they will work together to crunch the set?
I have been walking through the documentation, and it is explaining what to do, but not necessarily all the time explaining why it does what it does.
In order to effectively query this index, do you just add additional instances to the cluster and they will work together to crunch the set?
That is exactly what you need to do. Typically it's an iterative process:
start by putting a subset of the data in. You can also put in all the data, if time and cost permit.
put some search load on it that is as close as possible to production conditions, e.g. by turning on whatever search integration you're planning to use. If you're planning to only issue queries manually, now's the time to try them and gauge their speed and the relevance of the results.
see if the queries are particularly slow and if their results are relevant enough. You change the index mappings or queries you're using to achieve faster results, and indeed add more nodes to your cluster.
Since you mention Logstash, there are a few things that may help further:
check out Filebeat for indexing the data on an ongoing basis. You may not need to do the work of reading the files and bulk indexing yourself.
if it's log or log-like data and you're mostly interested in more recent results, it could be a lot faster to split up the data by date & time (e.g. index-2019-08-11, index-2019-08-12, index-2019-08-13). See the Index Lifecycle Management feature for automating this.
try using the Keyword field type where appropriate in your mappings. It stops analysis on the field, preventing you from doing full-text searches inside the field and only allowing exact string matches. Useful for fields like a "tags" field or a "status" field with something like ["draft", "review", "published"] values.
Good luck!
I am using ElasticSearch with Kibana to store and visualize data from my logs. I know it is customary to use Logstash, but I just use the elasticsearch Rest API and POST new elements to it.
I am trying to look for best practices in terms of how I should manage my indices, given I have about 50k logs per day, and I want to visualize sometimes weekly, sometimes monthly and sometimes yearly data. And also I have no need for more than one node. I don't need a high available cluster.
So I am basically trying to determine:
-How should I store my indexes, by time? Monthly? Weekly? One index for everything?
-What are the disadvantages of a huge index (one index that contains all my data)? Does it mean that the entire index is in memory?
Thank you.
I like to match indexes to the data retention policy. Daily indexes work very well for log files, so you can expire one day's worth after X days of retention.
The fewer indexes/shards you have, the less RAM is used in overhead by Elasticsearch to manage them.
The mapping for a field is frozen when the field is added to the index. With a daily index, I can update the mapping and have it take effect for the new indexes, and wait for the old ones to expire. With a longer-term indexes, you'd probably need to reindex the data, which I always try to avoid.
The settings for shards and replicas are also frozen when you create the index.
You can visualize them in Kibana regardless of how they're stored. Use the #timestamp field as your X-axis and change the "interval" to the period you want.
Using logstash would be important if you wanted to alter your logs at all. We do a lot of normalization and creation of new fields, so it's very helpful. If it's not a requirement for you, you might also look into filebeats, which can write directly to elasticsearch.
Lots to consider...