Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
-
In the underlying storage on disk, the keys and values are interleaved, so it's not really possible to save any disk I/O by reading just the keys. Perhaps it would allow us to skip some transmission and deserialization but that's not the main cost. So I'm not sure we can really get a meaningful savings here. With the upcoming sqlite storage engine, you'll of course be able to write a query that only returns one column. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Sometimes it would be useful to only list the "keys" using the Transactional Storage API, and not also having to retreive all of their values. If there are many entries, and they all have a lot of data in their values, then doing a .list() can potentially read N * 128 KiB of unneeded data into memory, which would only be discarded.
For example:
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions