mirror of
https://github.com/qdrant/landing_page.git
synced 2026-09-30 16:38:31 +02:00
Fix grammar in two places, and mention client version compatibility
This commit is contained in:
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ The ideal number of Qdrant nodes depends on how much you value cost-saving, resi
|
||||
- Cost: Larger clusters are be more costly than smaller clusters, which is the only drawback of this configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Balancing cost, resilience, and performance**: Running a two-node Qdrant cluster with replicated shards allows the cluster to respond to most read/write requests even when one node is down, such as during maintenance events. Having two nodes also means greater performance than a single-node cluster while still being cheaper than a three-node cluster. Drawbacks:
|
||||
- Resilience (uptime): The cluster cannot perform operations on collections when one node is down. Those operations require >50% of nodes to be running, so this is only possible in a 3+ node cluster. Since creating, editing, and deleting collections are usually rare operations, many user find this drawback to be negligible.
|
||||
- Resilience (uptime): The cluster cannot perform operations on collections when one node is down. Those operations require >50% of nodes to be running, so this is only possible in a 3+ node cluster. Since creating, editing, and deleting collections are usually rare operations, many users find this drawback to be negligible.
|
||||
- Resilience (data integrity): If the data on one of the two nodes is permanently lost or corrupted, it cannot be recovered aside from snapshots or backups. Only 3+ node clusters can recover from the permanent loss of a single node since recovery operations require >50% of the cluster to be healthy.
|
||||
- Cost: Replicating your shards requires storing two copies of your data.
|
||||
- Performance: The maximum performance of a Qdrant cluster increases as you add more nodes.
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user