Performance impact of long field name and date type

Elastic Stack Elasticsearch
1

Hi

I am investigating performance impact of long fields name in document
example created_timestamp_field1 vs ctf1
Q1) Which is preferred or best practice for field value and is there
any performance / storage benefit?
*
*
Also is there any impact of storing date as long or in some format
example 0000 vs 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00.
date is eventually converted in long so not sure there is any impact of it
in performance or storage
Q2) Is there any impact of using any of the above date value?
*
*
Thanks
-Maaz

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

2

Can some one help me on this?

On Monday, July 29, 2013 5:29:45 PM UTC+5, Maaz Bin Tariq wrote:

Hi

I am investigating performance impact of long fields name in document
example created_timestamp_field1 vs ctf1
Q1) Which is preferred or best practice for field value and is there
any performance / storage benefit?
*
*
Also is there any impact of storing date as long or in some format
example 0000 vs 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00.
date is eventually converted in long so not sure there is any impact of it
in performance or storage
Q2) Is there any impact of using any of the above date value?
*
*
Thanks
-Maaz

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

3

A1) may a little storage benefit when _source is stored (default).
IMHO, the more sense you give to a field using its field name, the better readabilty you will get when maintening your application.
Also, depending to your use case, users (experts) could have access to query parser and use notation like field:value.
In that case, having some meaning in field naming could help.

A2) dates are converted to ms since epoch. I don't think you should worry about it.

HTH

David :wink:
Twitter : @dadoonet / @elasticsearchfr / @scrutmydocs

Le 30 juil. 2013 à 07:14, Maaz maaz786@gmail.com a écrit :

Can some one help me on this?

On Monday, July 29, 2013 5:29:45 PM UTC+5, Maaz Bin Tariq wrote:

Hi

I am investigating performance impact of long fields name in document
example created_timestamp_field1 vs ctf1
Q1) Which is preferred or best practice for field value and is there any performance / storage benefit?

Also is there any impact of storing date as long or in some format
example 0000 vs 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00.
date is eventually converted in long so not sure there is any impact of it in performance or storage
Q2) Is there any impact of using any of the above date value?

Thanks
-Maaz
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.