elasticsearch/docs/reference/cluster/allocation-explain.asciidoc

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

449 lines
16 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
[[cluster-allocation-explain]]
=== Cluster allocation explain API
++++
<titleabbrev>Cluster allocation explain</titleabbrev>
++++
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
Provides an explanation for a shard's current <<index-modules-allocation,allocation>>.
[source,console]
----
GET _cluster/allocation/explain
{
"index": "my-index-000001",
"shard": 0,
"primary": false,
"current_node": "my-node"
}
----
// TEST[setup:my_index]
// TEST[s/"primary": false,/"primary": false/]
// TEST[s/"current_node": "my-node"//]
[[cluster-allocation-explain-api-request]]
==== {api-request-title}
`GET _cluster/allocation/explain`
`POST _cluster/allocation/explain`
[[cluster-allocation-explain-api-prereqs]]
==== {api-prereq-title}
* If the {es} {security-features} are enabled, you must have the `monitor` or
`manage` <<privileges-list-cluster,cluster privilege>> to use this API.
[[cluster-allocation-explain-api-desc]]
==== {api-description-title}
The purpose of the cluster allocation explain API is to provide
2021-03-31 21:57:47 +08:00
explanations for shard allocations in the cluster. For unassigned shards,
the explain API provides an explanation for why the shard is unassigned.
For assigned shards, the explain API provides an explanation for why the
shard is remaining on its current node and has not moved or rebalanced to
another node. This API can be very useful when attempting to diagnose why a
shard is unassigned or why a shard continues to remain on its current node when
you might expect otherwise.
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
[[cluster-allocation-explain-api-query-params]]
==== {api-query-parms-title}
`include_disk_info`::
(Optional, Boolean) If `true`, returns information about disk usage and
shard sizes. Defaults to `false`.
`include_yes_decisions`::
(Optional, Boolean) If `true`, returns 'YES' decisions in explanation.
Defaults to `false`.
[[cluster-allocation-explain-api-request-body]]
==== {api-request-body-title}
`current_node`::
(Optional, string) Specifies the node ID or the name of the node currently
holding the shard to explain. To explain an unassigned shard, omit this
parameter.
`index`::
(Optional, string) Specifies the name of the index that you would like an
explanation for.
`primary`::
(Optional, Boolean) If `true`, returns explanation for the primary shard
for the given shard ID.
`shard`::
(Optional, integer) Specifies the ID of the shard that you would like an
explanation for.
[[cluster-allocation-explain-api-examples]]
==== {api-examples-title}
===== Unassigned primary shard
====== Conflicting settings
The following request gets an allocation explanation for an unassigned primary
shard.
////
[source,console]
----
PUT my-index-000001?master_timeout=1s&timeout=1s
Allocate newly created indices on data_hot tier nodes (#61342) This commit adds the functionality to allocate newly created indices on nodes in the "hot" tier by default when they are created. This does not break existing behavior, as nodes with the `data` role are considered to be part of the hot tier. Users that separate their deployments by using the `data_hot` (and `data_warm`, `data_cold`, `data_frozen`) roles will have their data allocated on the hot tier nodes now by default. This change is a little more complicated than changing the default value for `index.routing.allocation.include._tier` from null to "data_hot". Instead, this adds the ability to have a plugin inject a setting into the builder for a newly created index. This has the benefit of allowing this setting to be visible as part of the settings when retrieving the index, for example: ``` // Create an index PUT /eggplant // Get an index GET /eggplant?flat_settings ``` Returns the default settings now of: ```json { "eggplant" : { "aliases" : { }, "mappings" : { }, "settings" : { "index.creation_date" : "1597855465598", "index.number_of_replicas" : "1", "index.number_of_shards" : "1", "index.provided_name" : "eggplant", "index.routing.allocation.include._tier" : "data_hot", "index.uuid" : "6ySG78s9RWGystRipoBFCA", "index.version.created" : "8000099" } } } ``` After the initial setting of this setting, it can be treated like any other index level setting. This new setting is *not* set on a new index if any of the following is true: - The index is created with an `index.routing.allocation.include.<anything>` setting - The index is created with an `index.routing.allocation.exclude.<anything>` setting - The index is created with an `index.routing.allocation.require.<anything>` setting - The index is created with a null `index.routing.allocation.include._tier` value - The index was created from an existing source metadata (shrink, clone, split, etc) Relates to #60848
2020-08-28 02:51:12 +08:00
{
"settings": {
"index.routing.allocation.include._name": "nonexistent_node",
"index.routing.allocation.include._tier_preference": null
Allocate newly created indices on data_hot tier nodes (#61342) This commit adds the functionality to allocate newly created indices on nodes in the "hot" tier by default when they are created. This does not break existing behavior, as nodes with the `data` role are considered to be part of the hot tier. Users that separate their deployments by using the `data_hot` (and `data_warm`, `data_cold`, `data_frozen`) roles will have their data allocated on the hot tier nodes now by default. This change is a little more complicated than changing the default value for `index.routing.allocation.include._tier` from null to "data_hot". Instead, this adds the ability to have a plugin inject a setting into the builder for a newly created index. This has the benefit of allowing this setting to be visible as part of the settings when retrieving the index, for example: ``` // Create an index PUT /eggplant // Get an index GET /eggplant?flat_settings ``` Returns the default settings now of: ```json { "eggplant" : { "aliases" : { }, "mappings" : { }, "settings" : { "index.creation_date" : "1597855465598", "index.number_of_replicas" : "1", "index.number_of_shards" : "1", "index.provided_name" : "eggplant", "index.routing.allocation.include._tier" : "data_hot", "index.uuid" : "6ySG78s9RWGystRipoBFCA", "index.version.created" : "8000099" } } } ``` After the initial setting of this setting, it can be treated like any other index level setting. This new setting is *not* set on a new index if any of the following is true: - The index is created with an `index.routing.allocation.include.<anything>` setting - The index is created with an `index.routing.allocation.exclude.<anything>` setting - The index is created with an `index.routing.allocation.require.<anything>` setting - The index is created with a null `index.routing.allocation.include._tier` value - The index was created from an existing source metadata (shrink, clone, split, etc) Relates to #60848
2020-08-28 02:51:12 +08:00
}
}
----
////
[source,console]
----
GET _cluster/allocation/explain
{
"index": "my-index-000001",
"shard": 0,
"primary": true
}
----
// TEST[continued]
The API response indicates the shard can only be allocated to a nonexistent
node.
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
[source,console-result]
----
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
{
"index" : "my-index-000001",
"shard" : 0,
"primary" : true,
"current_state" : "unassigned", <1>
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
"unassigned_info" : {
"reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", <2>
"at" : "2017-01-04T18:08:16.600Z",
"last_allocation_status" : "no"
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
},
"can_allocate" : "no", <3>
"allocate_explanation" : "Elasticsearch isn't allowed to allocate this shard to any of the nodes in the cluster. Choose a node to which you expect this shard to be allocated, find this node in the node-by-node explanation, and address the reasons which prevent Elasticsearch from allocating this shard there.",
"node_allocation_decisions" : [
{
"node_id" : "8qt2rY-pT6KNZB3-hGfLnw",
"node_name" : "node-0",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9401",
"roles" : ["data", "data_cold", "data_content", "data_frozen", "data_hot", "data_warm", "ingest", "master", "ml", "remote_cluster_client", "transform"],
"node_attributes" : {},
"node_decision" : "no", <4>
"weight_ranking" : 1,
"deciders" : [
{
"decider" : "filter", <5>
"decision" : "NO",
"explanation" : "node does not match index setting [index.routing.allocation.include] filters [_name:\"nonexistent_node\"]" <6>
}
]
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
}
]
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
}
----
// TESTRESPONSE[s/"at" : "[^"]*"/"at" : $body.$_path/]
// TESTRESPONSE[s/"node_id" : "[^"]*"/"node_id" : $body.$_path/]
// TESTRESPONSE[s/"transport_address" : "[^"]*"/"transport_address" : $body.$_path/]
// TESTRESPONSE[s/"roles" : \[("[a-z_]*",)*("[a-z_]*")\]/"roles" : $body.$_path/]
// TESTRESPONSE[s/"node_attributes" : \{\}/"node_attributes" : $body.$_path/]
<1> The current state of the shard.
<2> The reason for the shard originally becoming unassigned.
<3> Whether to allocate the shard.
<4> Whether to allocate the shard to the particular node.
<5> The decider which led to the `no` decision for the node.
<6> An explanation as to why the decider returned a `no` decision, with a helpful hint pointing to the setting that led to the decision. In this example, a newly created index has <<indices-get-settings,an index setting>> that requires that it only be allocated to a node named `nonexistent_node`, which does not exist, so the index is unable to allocate.
====== Maximum number of retries exceeded
The following response contains an allocation explanation for an unassigned
primary shard that has reached the maximum number of allocation retry attempts.
[source,js]
----
{
"index" : "my-index-000001",
"shard" : 0,
"primary" : true,
"current_state" : "unassigned",
"unassigned_info" : {
"at" : "2017-01-04T18:03:28.464Z",
"failed shard on node [mEKjwwzLT1yJVb8UxT6anw]: failed recovery, failure RecoveryFailedException",
"reason": "ALLOCATION_FAILED",
"failed_allocation_attempts": 5,
"last_allocation_status": "no",
},
"can_allocate": "no",
"allocate_explanation": "cannot allocate because allocation is not permitted to any of the nodes",
"node_allocation_decisions" : [
{
"node_id" : "3sULLVJrRneSg0EfBB-2Ew",
"node_name" : "node_t0",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9400",
"roles" : ["data_content", "data_hot"],
"node_decision" : "no",
"store" : {
"matching_size" : "4.2kb",
"matching_size_in_bytes" : 4325
},
"deciders" : [
{
"decider": "max_retry",
"decision" : "NO",
"explanation": "shard has exceeded the maximum number of retries [5] on failed allocation attempts - manually call [/_cluster/reroute?retry_failed=true] to retry, [unassigned_info[[reason=ALLOCATION_FAILED], at[2024-07-30T21:04:12.166Z], failed_attempts[5], failed_nodes[[mEKjwwzLT1yJVb8UxT6anw]], delayed=false, details[failed shard on node [mEKjwwzLT1yJVb8UxT6anw]: failed recovery, failure RecoveryFailedException], allocation_status[deciders_no]]]"
}
]
}
]
}
----
// NOTCONSOLE
If decider message indicates a transient allocation issue, use
<<cluster-reroute,the cluster reroute API>> to retry allocation.
====== No valid shard copy
The following response contains an allocation explanation for an unassigned
primary shard that was previously allocated.
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
[source,js]
----
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
{
"index" : "my-index-000001",
"shard" : 0,
"primary" : true,
"current_state" : "unassigned",
"unassigned_info" : {
"reason" : "NODE_LEFT",
"at" : "2017-01-04T18:03:28.464Z",
"details" : "node_left[OIWe8UhhThCK0V5XfmdrmQ]",
"last_allocation_status" : "no_valid_shard_copy"
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
},
"can_allocate" : "no_valid_shard_copy",
"allocate_explanation" : "Elasticsearch can't allocate this shard because there are no copies of its data in the cluster. Elasticsearch will allocate this shard when a node holding a good copy of its data joins the cluster. If no such node is available, restore this index from a recent snapshot."
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
}
----
// NOTCONSOLE
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
TIP: If a shard is unassigned with an allocation status of `no_valid_shard_copy`, then you should <<fix-cluster-status-recover-nodes,make sure that all nodes are in the cluster>>. If all the nodes containing in-sync copies of a shard are lost, then you can <<fix-cluster-status-restore,recover the data for the shard>>.
===== Unassigned replica shard
====== Allocation delayed
The following response contains an allocation explanation for a replica that's
unassigned due to <<delayed-allocation,delayed allocation>>.
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
[source,js]
----
{
"index" : "my-index-000001",
"shard" : 0,
"primary" : false,
"current_state" : "unassigned",
"unassigned_info" : {
"reason" : "NODE_LEFT",
"at" : "2017-01-04T18:53:59.498Z",
"details" : "node_left[G92ZwuuaRY-9n8_tc-IzEg]",
"last_allocation_status" : "no_attempt"
},
"can_allocate" : "allocation_delayed",
"allocate_explanation" : "The node containing this shard copy recently left the cluster. Elasticsearch is waiting for it to return. If the node does not return within [%s] then Elasticsearch will allocate this shard to another node. Please wait.",
"configured_delay" : "1m", <1>
"configured_delay_in_millis" : 60000,
"remaining_delay" : "59.8s", <2>
"remaining_delay_in_millis" : 59824,
"node_allocation_decisions" : [
{
"node_id" : "pmnHu_ooQWCPEFobZGbpWw",
"node_name" : "node_t2",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9402",
"roles" : ["data_content", "data_hot"],
"node_decision" : "yes"
},
{
"node_id" : "3sULLVJrRneSg0EfBB-2Ew",
"node_name" : "node_t0",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9400",
"roles" : ["data_content", "data_hot"],
"node_decision" : "no",
"store" : { <3>
"matching_size" : "4.2kb",
"matching_size_in_bytes" : 4325
},
"deciders" : [
{
"decider" : "same_shard",
"decision" : "NO",
"explanation" : "a copy of this shard is already allocated to this node [[my-index-000001][0], node[3sULLVJrRneSg0EfBB-2Ew], [P], s[STARTED], a[id=eV9P8BN1QPqRc3B4PLx6cg]]"
}
]
}
]
}
----
// NOTCONSOLE
<1> The configured delay before allocating a replica shard that does not exist due to the node holding it leaving the cluster.
<2> The remaining delay before allocating the replica shard.
<3> Information about the shard data found on a node.
====== Allocation throttled
The following response contains an allocation explanation for a replica that's
queued to allocate but currently waiting on other queued shards.
[source,js]
----
{
"index" : "my-index-000001",
"shard" : 0,
"primary" : false,
"current_state" : "unassigned",
"unassigned_info" : {
"reason" : "NODE_LEFT",
"at" : "2017-01-04T18:53:59.498Z",
"details" : "node_left[G92ZwuuaRY-9n8_tc-IzEg]",
"last_allocation_status" : "no_attempt"
},
"can_allocate": "throttled",
"allocate_explanation": "Elasticsearch is currently busy with other activities. It expects to be able to allocate this shard when those activities finish. Please wait.",
"node_allocation_decisions" : [
{
"node_id" : "3sULLVJrRneSg0EfBB-2Ew",
"node_name" : "node_t0",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9400",
"roles" : ["data_content", "data_hot"],
"node_decision" : "no",
"deciders" : [
{
"decider": "throttling",
"decision": "THROTTLE",
"explanation": "reached the limit of incoming shard recoveries [2], cluster setting [cluster.routing.allocation.node_concurrent_incoming_recoveries=2] (can also be set via [cluster.routing.allocation.node_concurrent_recoveries])"
}
]
}
]
}
----
// NOTCONSOLE
This is a transient message that might appear when a large amount of shards are allocating.
===== Assigned shard
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
====== Cannot remain on current node
The following response contains an allocation explanation for an assigned shard.
The response indicates the shard is not allowed to remain on its current node
and must be reallocated.
Add API to explain why a shard is or isn't assigned This adds a new `/_cluster/allocation/explain` API that explains why a shard can or cannot be allocated to nodes in the cluster. Additionally, it will show where the master *desires* to put the shard, according to the `ShardsAllocator`. It looks like this: ``` GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?pretty { "index": "only-foo", "shard": 0, "primary": false } ``` Though, you can optionally send an empty body, which means "explain the allocation for the first unassigned shard you find". The output when a shard is unassigned looks like this: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : false }, "assigned" : false, "unassigned_info" : { "reason" : "INDEX_CREATED", "at" : "2016-03-22T20:04:23.620Z" }, "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 0.06666675, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : -1.3833332, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 2.3166666, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` And when the shard *is* assigned, the output looks like: ``` { "shard" : { "index" : "only-foo", "index_uuid" : "KnW0-zELRs6PK84l0r38ZA", "id" : 0, "primary" : true }, "assigned" : true, "assigned_node_id" : "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g", "nodes" : { "V-Spi0AyRZ6ZvKbaI3691w" : { "node_name" : "Susan Storm", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz" }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 1.4499999, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] }, "Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g" : { "node_name" : "Slipstream", "node_attributes" : { "bar" : "baz", "foo" : "bar" }, "final_decision" : "CURRENTLY_ASSIGNED", "weight" : 0.0, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "same_shard", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "the shard cannot be allocated on the same node id [Qc6VL8c5RWaw1qXZ0Rg57g] on which it already exists" } ] }, "PzdyMZGXQdGhqTJHF_hGgA" : { "node_name" : "The Symbiote", "node_attributes" : { }, "final_decision" : "NO", "weight" : 3.6999998, "decisions" : [ { "decider" : "filter", "decision" : "NO", "explanation" : "node does not match index include filters [foo:\"bar\"]" } ] } } } ``` Only "NO" decisions are returned by default, but all decisions can be shown by specifying the `?include_yes_decisions=true` parameter in the request. Resolves #14593
2016-02-27 04:21:36 +08:00
[source,js]
----
{
"index" : "my-index-000001",
"shard" : 0,
"primary" : true,
"current_state" : "started",
"current_node" : {
"id" : "8lWJeJ7tSoui0bxrwuNhTA",
"name" : "node_t1",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9401",
"roles" : ["data_content", "data_hot"]
},
"can_remain_on_current_node" : "no", <1>
"can_remain_decisions" : [ <2>
{
"decider" : "filter",
"decision" : "NO",
"explanation" : "node does not match index setting [index.routing.allocation.include] filters [_name:\"nonexistent_node\"]"
}
],
"can_move_to_other_node" : "no", <3>
"move_explanation" : "This shard may not remain on its current node, but Elasticsearch isn't allowed to move it to another node. Choose a node to which you expect this shard to be allocated, find this node in the node-by-node explanation, and address the reasons which prevent Elasticsearch from allocating this shard there.",
"node_allocation_decisions" : [
{
"node_id" : "_P8olZS8Twax9u6ioN-GGA",
"node_name" : "node_t0",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9400",
"roles" : ["data_content", "data_hot"],
"node_decision" : "no",
"weight_ranking" : 1,
"deciders" : [
{
"decider" : "filter",
"decision" : "NO",
"explanation" : "node does not match index setting [index.routing.allocation.include] filters [_name:\"nonexistent_node\"]"
}
]
}
]
}
----
// NOTCONSOLE
<1> Whether the shard is allowed to remain on its current node.
<2> The deciders that factored into the decision of why the shard is not allowed to remain on its current node.
<3> Whether the shard is allowed to be allocated to another node.
====== Must remain on current node
The following response contains an allocation explanation for a shard that must
remain on its current node. Moving the shard to another node would not improve
cluster balance.
Expose the ClusterInfo object in the allocation explain output This adds an optional parameter to the cluster allocation explain API that will return the cluster info object, `include_disk_info`, the output looks like: GET /_cluster/allocation/explain?include_disk_info -d' {"index": "i", "shard": 0, "primary": false}' { ... other info ... "cluster_info" : { "nodes" : { "7Uws-vL7R6WVm3ZwQA1n5A" : { "node_name" : "Kraven the Hunter", "least_available" : { "path" : "/path/to/data1", "total_bytes" : 165999570944, "used_bytes" : 118180614144, "free_bytes" : 47818956800, "free_disk_percent" : 28.80667493781158, "used_disk_percent" : 71.19332506218842 }, "most_available" : { "path" : "/path/to/data2", "total_bytes" : 165999570944, "used_bytes" : 118180614144, "free_bytes" : 47818956800, "free_disk_percent" : 28.80667493781158, "used_disk_percent" : 71.19332506218842 } } }, "shard_sizes" : { "[i][2][p]_bytes" : 0, "[i][4][p]_bytes" : 130, "[i][1][p]_bytes" : 0, "[i][3][p]_bytes" : 0, "[i][0][p]_bytes" : 130 }, "shard_paths" : { "[i][3], node[7Uws-vL7R6WVm3ZwQA1n5A], [P], s[STARTED], a[id=LegZLDniTVaw0Y1urv7s3g]" : "/path/to/data1/nodes/0", "[i][1], node[7Uws-vL7R6WVm3ZwQA1n5A], [P], s[STARTED], a[id=lAU_4vf_SKmoRdtg0ACnjQ]" : "/path/to/data1/nodes/0", "[i][2], node[7Uws-vL7R6WVm3ZwQA1n5A], [P], s[STARTED], a[id=Aurpeuj7SeGeyPDDpCtRgg]" : "/path/to/data1/nodes/0", "[i][0], node[7Uws-vL7R6WVm3ZwQA1n5A], [P], s[STARTED], a[id=Vgg8GlQTQ82C2j6HYBq8DQ]" : "/path/to/data1/nodes/0", "[i][4], node[7Uws-vL7R6WVm3ZwQA1n5A], [P], s[STARTED], a[id=t8hQlVSxQe-58fSeaXcAqg]" : "/path/to/data1/nodes/0" } } } Resolves #14405
2016-06-24 05:05:39 +08:00
[source,js]
----
{
"index" : "my-index-000001",
"shard" : 0,
"primary" : true,
"current_state" : "started",
"current_node" : {
"id" : "wLzJm4N4RymDkBYxwWoJsg",
"name" : "node_t0",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9400",
"roles" : ["data_content", "data_hot"],
"weight_ranking" : 1
},
"can_remain_on_current_node" : "yes",
"can_rebalance_cluster" : "yes", <1>
"can_rebalance_to_other_node" : "no", <2>
"rebalance_explanation" : "Elasticsearch cannot rebalance this shard to another node since there is no node to which allocation is permitted which would improve the cluster balance. If you expect this shard to be rebalanced to another node, find this node in the node-by-node explanation and address the reasons which prevent Elasticsearch from rebalancing this shard there.",
"node_allocation_decisions" : [
{
"node_id" : "oE3EGFc8QN-Tdi5FFEprIA",
"node_name" : "node_t1",
"transport_address" : "127.0.0.1:9401",
"roles" : ["data_content", "data_hot"],
"node_decision" : "worse_balance", <3>
"weight_ranking" : 1
}
]
}
----
// NOTCONSOLE
<1> Whether rebalancing is allowed on the cluster.
<2> Whether the shard can be rebalanced to another node.
<3> The reason the shard cannot be rebalanced to the node, in this case indicating that it offers no better balance than the current node.
===== No arguments
If you call the API with no arguments, {es} retrieves an allocation explanation
for an arbitrary unassigned primary or replica shard, returning any unassigned primary shards first.
[source,console]
----
GET _cluster/allocation/explain
----
// TEST[catch:bad_request]
If the cluster contains no unassigned shards, the API returns a `400` error.