<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Distributed Indexer Hardware in Getting Data In</title>
    <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239124#M46450</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I'm working to purchase additional indexers, but am trying to figure out what would be the best configuration of servers.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Essentially, I can purchase one R730 with 24 hard disks in a RAID 10, or I can buy 4 R550s, each with 8 hard disks in a raid 10. Both server configs would have 2 CPUs and however much RAM I wanted (I understand the requirements are low).&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I am trying to accelerate searches and provide redundancy and recovery more than trying to increase indexing rate or volume. &lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I can try to provide more information if needed. I've read through the sizing documentation, and I can't find any concrete recommendations for disk configuration.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Neill&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:33:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ckillg</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-09-24T14:33:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Distributed Indexer Hardware</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239124#M46450</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I'm working to purchase additional indexers, but am trying to figure out what would be the best configuration of servers.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Essentially, I can purchase one R730 with 24 hard disks in a RAID 10, or I can buy 4 R550s, each with 8 hard disks in a raid 10. Both server configs would have 2 CPUs and however much RAM I wanted (I understand the requirements are low).&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I am trying to accelerate searches and provide redundancy and recovery more than trying to increase indexing rate or volume. &lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I can try to provide more information if needed. I've read through the sizing documentation, and I can't find any concrete recommendations for disk configuration.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Neill&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:33:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239124#M46450</guid>
      <dc:creator>ckillg</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-09-24T14:33:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Distributed Indexer Hardware</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239125#M46451</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I would go the route of more indexers /servers...   your data will be better distributed and will provide opportunities for faster searches. Will provide more options on clustering side as well. (More servers typically better than a single server for indexer)&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;From  disk standpoint you can find some info &lt;A href="https://wiki.splunk.com/Community:HardwareTuningFactors"&gt;here&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:51:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239125#M46451</guid>
      <dc:creator>Yasaswy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-09-24T14:51:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Distributed Indexer Hardware</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239126#M46452</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If redundancy is what you want then the rule of not keeping all your eggs in one basket is definitely the way to go.  A cluster of multiples is the far better route, and for a bonus you get easier maintainability, too.  (Having the option to drop one of 4 out of the pile leaving the other 3 to take up the load in the meantime is a boon to maintenance operations.)&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 15:06:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239126#M46452</guid>
      <dc:creator>grijhwani</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-09-24T15:06:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Distributed Indexer Hardware</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239127#M46453</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Any idea if SSDs make a significant difference in search speed?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 15:19:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239127#M46453</guid>
      <dc:creator>ckillg</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-09-24T15:19:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Distributed Indexer Hardware</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239128#M46454</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;found this &lt;A href="http://blogs.splunk.com/2012/05/10/quantifying-the-benefits-of-splunk-with-ssds/"&gt;http://blogs.splunk.com/2012/05/10/quantifying-the-benefits-of-splunk-with-ssds/&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 15:36:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Distributed-Indexer-Hardware/m-p/239128#M46454</guid>
      <dc:creator>ckillg</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-09-24T15:36:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

