# Limit of total fields \[1000\] in index has been exceeded

**URL:** <https://discuss.elastic.co/t/limit-of-total-fields-1000-in-index-has-been-exceeded/87280>\
**Category:** Elasticsearch\
**Created:** [May 26, 2017, 4:00pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/limit-of-total-fields-1000-in-index-has-been-exceeded/87280 "2017-05-26T16:00:48Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nik9000](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/nik9000/32/44947_2.png) [@nik9000](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/nik9000)\
**Post date:** [May 26, 2017, 5:10pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/limit-of-total-fields-1000-in-index-has-been-exceeded/87280/4 "2017-05-26T17:10:09Z")

</div>

Don't make so many fields. Personally I don't like dynamic mapping. I set `"dynamic": false` which will store new fields but not index them. Then I can carefully decide which fields to add. Other folks with other use cases like `"dynamic": "strict"` which will reject changes that add new fields.

The usual strategies for making fewer fields is to combine similar ones or to use key/value objects and nested fields. key/value objects with nested fields are much slower to query than regular fields, but they don't have the sparsity storage problems. I prefer to try and lay out the data not to have so many fields. But I don't know your use case so I can't really give you any hints on how to do that.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/limit-of-total-fields-1000-in-index-has-been-exceeded/87280)._