<?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 Dedup vs. Lookup performance in Splunk Search</title>
    <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Splunk-Search/Dedup-vs-Lookup-performance/m-p/19870#M3055</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have some very high volume firewall records.  I want to check the destination IP address against a lookup table that contains known malware C&amp;amp;C IPs.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Is it more efficient to dedup the records and then do the lookup or is it faster to do a lookup on each one?&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thx.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Craig&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 18:21:14 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>responsys_cm</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-07-27T18:21:14Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Dedup vs. Lookup performance</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Splunk-Search/Dedup-vs-Lookup-performance/m-p/19870#M3055</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have some very high volume firewall records.  I want to check the destination IP address against a lookup table that contains known malware C&amp;amp;C IPs.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Is it more efficient to dedup the records and then do the lookup or is it faster to do a lookup on each one?&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thx.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Craig&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 18:21:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Splunk-Search/Dedup-vs-Lookup-performance/m-p/19870#M3055</guid>
      <dc:creator>responsys_cm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-07-27T18:21:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Dedup vs. Lookup performance</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Splunk-Search/Dedup-vs-Lookup-performance/m-p/19871#M3056</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Part of it will be depend on the size of the lookup table.  Neither choice has a nonzero cost.  Dedup'ing can be expensive for a large number of events, but comparing against a large lookup table might also be expensive.  &lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I would recommend that you model out both scenarios and use the search job inspector to compare and contrast the amount of time spent in each.  &lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Also, you may want to consider summary indexing as a 3rd alternative.  A summary that gets updated every few minutes on something as simple as &lt;CODE&gt;| sistats count by destip&lt;/CODE&gt; could give you a workably fast solution.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 19:47:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Splunk-Search/Dedup-vs-Lookup-performance/m-p/19871#M3056</guid>
      <dc:creator>dwaddle</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-07-27T19:47:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Dedup vs. Lookup performance</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Splunk-Search/Dedup-vs-Lookup-performance/m-p/19872#M3057</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Additionally, if the lookup table is small enough, you could use &lt;CODE&gt;inputlookup&lt;/CODE&gt; in a subsearch to query only addresses from the lookup list:&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;sourcetype=myfirewall [ | inputlookup cc_ipslist | return 10000 ip ]
&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;

&lt;P&gt;will expand to smth like&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;sourcetype=myfirewall ( ip=1.1.1.1 OR ip=2.2.2.2 OR ip=3.3.3.3 ....)
&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 2012 01:10:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Splunk-Search/Dedup-vs-Lookup-performance/m-p/19872#M3057</guid>
      <dc:creator>ziegfried</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-07-28T01:10:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

