Is this good practice using shorter property names in AppEngine?

Question

According to several sources, such as this presentation by Johan Euphrosine , AppEngine stores property names along with data and indexes. Because of this, I use shorthand versions of view names and properties in the data store to save disk space:

@Entity("p")
public class PersistentClass {

    @Property("n")
    private String name;

}

The indices for this object will be on the line:

PersistentClass:1
PersistentClass:name:foo:PersistentClass:1

Compared to (using property abbreviations):

p:1
p:n:foo:p:1

This is a 73% compression, but it is a theoretical exercise and it is difficult to move forward without internal knowledge of the platform. My question is: is this a common practice? Has anyone measured the persistence of saved shortened property names in NoSQL and AppEngine in particular?

Answer 1

- , , . Gist (https://gist.github.com/jeremydw/7201456), 2000 , 2000 .

(https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/python/datastore/stats) , . (278 ). , , .

:

name: l_PersistentClass2, bytes: 1507635
name: super_very_long_property_name_PersistentClass1, bytes: 1787607
difference: 279972 bytes

Answer 2

- .

, . , , , - . ( ) 5% .

, , - GAE.

Answer 3

, .

, , , , .

. , , 80 . , 1 2 .

, . , , , , .