Our workload is rather different from this. Indexing and document updates occur in an somewhat exponential decay pattern back in time, same with queries. So there's less sharp cut offs
If we ran a hot-cold architecture we'd get a few issues
Within each tier we'd get imbalanced workload over the nodes. Since within the tier the workload varies greatly with age of the indexes
We use AWS i3 NVMe SSD instances. d2's with HDDs or using EBS have too long IO latency/throughput/iops even for our "cold" data workload. So a cold tier would scale based on storage needs, but in this tier we'd be wasting lots of compute capacity. And a hot tier would scale based on compute needs, and waste tons of storage capacity.
By running both hot and cold workloads on the same set of nodes we get much more cost effective utilization. Since the hot workload uses most of the aggregate compute capacity, and the cold data uses most of the storage.
But this then necessitates using Shardonnay to ensure we spread workload optimally across the clusters. And the more evenly we can spread it, the higher total utilization we can put on the clusters without having single nodes overload.
A hot/cold architecture would much more costly for our workload. Since we'd have to unused storage on the hot tier, and unused compute capacity on the cold tier. A single tier just makes much more sense for our particular use case
But currently we have concluded that it is not worth the added complexity. But that might change again if/when we learn more or get new requirements.
We do change the number of replicas for recent data vs old data. We actually have a 4 tiered approach to how many replicas we use.
I'd like to see this contrasted with the hot warm cold architecture which is the common approach to this problem.
Usually people deal with this problem by allocating faster/more/less storage dense hardware for recent data and slower/less/more storage dense hardware for older data. You can read more about this here https://www.elastic.co/blog/hot-warm-architecture-in-elastic...
Maybe something about it didn't work for them, but it's not clear to me from the article.
Disclaimer: I work for Elastic.