Use host.id for sorting security data#687
Merged
salvatore-campagna merged 1 commit intoelastic:masterfrom Oct 2, 2024
Merged
Conversation
host.hostname has cardinality 100 while host.id has cardinality 50. This happen because in the dataset there is a host.if per each couple ho hostnames, like a single host.id and for each of them two hostnames like 'dustin.windows' and 'dustin.linux'. This is probably an artifact of the data generation script. Lower cardinality fields might: * reduce sorting overhead due to less comparisons * improve compression due to more data clustering together This change should at least allow us if there is any benefit in choosing a lower cardinality field.
gbanasiak
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2024
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 2, 2024
host.hostname has cardinality 100 while host.id has cardinality 50. This happen because in the dataset there is a host.if per each couple ho hostnames, like a single host.id and for each of them two hostnames like 'dustin.windows' and 'dustin.linux'. This is probably an artifact of the data generation script. Lower cardinality fields might: * reduce sorting overhead due to less comparisons * improve compression due to more data clustering together This change should at least allow us if there is any benefit in choosing a lower cardinality field. (cherry picked from commit e2ca95e)
💚 All backports created successfully
Note: Successful backport PRs will be merged automatically after passing CI. Questions ?Please refer to the Backport tool documentation and see the Github Action logs for details |
gbanasiak
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 29, 2024
host.hostname has cardinality 100 while host.id has cardinality 50. This happen because in the dataset there is a host.if per each couple ho hostnames, like a single host.id and for each of them two hostnames like 'dustin.windows' and 'dustin.linux'. This is probably an artifact of the data generation script. Lower cardinality fields might: * reduce sorting overhead due to less comparisons * improve compression due to more data clustering together This change should at least allow us if there is any benefit in choosing a lower cardinality field. (cherry picked from commit e2ca95e) Co-authored-by: Salvatore Campagna <93581129+salvatore-campagna@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Elastic Machine <elasticmachine@users.noreply.github.com>
This was referenced Aug 28, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
host.hostnamehas cardinality 100 whilehost.idhas cardinality 50. This happen because in the dataset there is a host per each couple of hostnames, like a singlehost.idand for each of them two host names like 'dustin.windows' and 'dustin.linux'. This is probably an artifact of the data generation script.Lower cardinality fields might:
This change should at least allow us to see if there is any benefit in choosing a lower cardinality field
like
host.idversushost.hostname.Right now benchmarks run with version
9.0of Elasticsearch and it looks like we still don't havethe corresponding branch in Rally. As a result, Rally is checked out from master. For this reason
back-porting is not strictly required. We do the backport to
8.15in case we need to do somecomparison later on, comparing Elasticsearch
8.16versus8.15.