Hi Jeff,
Yeah, I get that, I'm just failing to see why this "alternative
representation" is even there and exposed in any way? The keys must be
indexed with the representation that I have constructed, as I can
perform lexicographical searches on those specific keys. So what's the
other representation all about? It seems wasteful to me. So I would
still like to understand better, what the mechanics are here...
Viktor
On Jan 9, 12:11 pm, Jeff Schnitzer <j...@infohazard.org> wrote:
> You have a mistaken understanding of what a Key is. Both values
> displayed on the Datastore Viewer
> ("aghtb2JjYS1zdHIOCxIHQ2hlY2tpbhjiQww" and "YourEntityKind: id=12345")
> are merely alternative visual representations. The actual value
> stored in BigTable is a binary representation of this data. It may or
> may not be more compact than either of these two visual
> representations, but you can be assured that there is only one stored
> version of it (not counting foreign key references or replication, of
> course).
>
> I don't work for Google, but I watched the Google I/O video on
> BigTable. You should too.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:07 PM, phraktle <phrak...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > could someone from Google weigh in on this?
>
> > thanks,
> > Viktor
>
> > On Jan 6, 12:43 pm, phraktle <phrak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi,
>
> >> I'm using the low-level DS API, thus short names for kinds, etc, and
> >> my keys are already quite compact. The encoded version is in fact
> >> significantly longer than my ownkey. So it would optimal, if DS did
> >> not try to second-guess and bloat my PKs. How do you know that DS
> >> doesn't actually store both versions? Do you know how to decode the DSkey?
>
> >> Regards,
> >> Viktor
>
> >> On Jan 5, 5:54 am, jd <jdpatter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > The encoded "EntityKey" is a representation that includes yourkey
> >> > name, entity kind, ancestors and app id - encoded into a form that is
> >> > safe to use in urls etc. Keeping your keys small and kinds small
> >> > (i.e. using short class names) will reduce storage space of keys in
> >> > the DS. In Twig (i.e. not JDO) you can keep the names of your classes
> >> > as you like and then override typetoKind(Type) to return abbreviated
> >> > names. I found that this saves a significant amount of space in my
> >> > app that has many relations between entities.
>
> >> >http://code.google.com/p/twig-persist/
>
> >> > On Jan 4, 5:01 pm, phraktle <phrak...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > Hi,
>
> >> > > I'm generating my own entity keys, with new Entity("Foo", "myId"). I
> >> > > noticed that in the DataStore viewer, these entities still seem to
> >> > > have a defaultkey:
>
> >> > > Decoded entitykey: Foo: name=myId
> >> > > Entitykey:
> >> > > ahFzY2FyYWJyZWNvbW1lbmRlcnJACxIVUHJvZHVjdFJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9uIiU1OTg1MEMzMzM
> >> > > wOUZGRjV8MjAxMDAxMDQwMTAzNTN8cHJvZF8wDA
>
> >> > > So the "Entitykey" here still seems to be generated by GAE. Why is
> >> > > this needed? I do have a primarykeyalready. So does it get stored as
> >> > > simply another indexed column? Does this impact storage space too? I
> >> > > don't need the GAE entitykeyat all, and would prefer not having to
> >> > > pay for its storage either :)
>
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > Viktor
>
> > --
> > 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
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
--
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.
