On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 2:20 AM, Toby <tobias.ro...@sunnymail.mobi> wrote: > thank you for your update. In fact I was suspecting the index or other > management data. But it is hard to believe that it leads to such a big > overhead. I mean it is enormous to have an index that is 10 times more > than the actual data, don't you think so?
If you look at the article, it doesn't seem that out of place. Remember that by default, two indexes are built for every property, EntitiesByProperty ASC and EntitiesByProperty DESC. If you look at the number of fields in the corresponding tables (see article), and if your entity has 5-10 fields, I would not be surprised by such an overhead. Marking properties as non-indexable, if you don't need the systematic indexing that Google does, will help save a lot of space. > Furthermore in the datastore statistics they already list so called > "Metadata". It is consuming about 44% of the space. I think that this > is the index, is it not? I don't think it is, no. I believe it refers to other kinds of metadata (see article linked earlier in the thread). Index disk space usage is, I believe, nowhere explicit. Eric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
