On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > On 09/15/2014 10:23 AM, Claudio Freire wrote: >> Now, large small keys could be 200 or 2000, or even 20k. I'd guess >> several should be tested to find the shape of the curve. > > Well, we know that it's not noticeable with 200, and that it is > noticeable with 100K. It's only worth testing further if we think that > having more than 200 top-level keys in one JSONB value is going to be a > use case for more than 0.1% of our users. I personally do not.
FWIW, I have written one (1) application that uses JSONB and it has one sub-object (not the top-level object) that in the most typical configuration contains precisely 270 keys. Now, granted, that is not the top-level object, if that distinction is actually relevant here, but color me just a bit skeptical of this claim anyway. This was just a casual thing I did for my own use, not anything industrial strength, so it's hard to believe I'm stressing the system more than 99.9% of users will. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
