RORK LABJP
DEADLINE — From August 31, 2026, Google Play requires target API level 36 (Android 16) or higher for both new apps and updates to existing ones. Thirteen days leftEXTENSION — If you cannot make the date, the deadline extension form in Play Console buys you until November 1. The extension is not automatic, so the request itself has to land before August 31TARGET SDK — Even for Expo and React Native apps produced by builders like Rork, the targetSdkVersion is yours to verify. A template pinned to an older SDK will not meet the requirement on its ownPOLICY — The spam and minimum functionality policy has been tightened around high-quality features and content experience, which puts thin, mass-produced apps squarely in scopePRIVACY — You are expected to explain in detail what data is collected, how it is used, and whether it is shared, including analytics SDKs and advertising identifiers a builder wires in for youRORK — Where the original Rork emits React Native and Expo, Rork Max generates SwiftUI. There is a free tier to start with, and paid plans begin at $25 per monthDEADLINE — From August 31, 2026, Google Play requires target API level 36 (Android 16) or higher for both new apps and updates to existing ones. Thirteen days leftEXTENSION — If you cannot make the date, the deadline extension form in Play Console buys you until November 1. The extension is not automatic, so the request itself has to land before August 31TARGET SDK — Even for Expo and React Native apps produced by builders like Rork, the targetSdkVersion is yours to verify. A template pinned to an older SDK will not meet the requirement on its ownPOLICY — The spam and minimum functionality policy has been tightened around high-quality features and content experience, which puts thin, mass-produced apps squarely in scopePRIVACY — You are expected to explain in detail what data is collected, how it is used, and whether it is shared, including analytics SDKs and advertising identifiers a builder wires in for youRORK — Where the original Rork emits React Native and Expo, Rork Max generates SwiftUI. There is a free tier to start with, and paid plans begin at $25 per month
Articles/App Dev
App Dev/2026-08-05Intermediate

A JSON File 19% Smaller That Ships Only 3% Smaller — Measuring Catalog Payloads Against gzip

Five payload formats measured on a 20,000-item wallpaper catalog. Key shortening saves just 3.2% after gzip, while a columnar layout cuts 26.8%. Real numbers for Brotli, paging, and JSON.parse time.

Rork535Expo171JSON2gzipperformance11

Premium Article

The catalog for a wallpaper app I operate had quietly grown past 20,000 items. The catalog JSON fetched right after launch weighed about 7MB uncompressed — close to 1MB even with gzip — and on slower connections the delay before first paint had become something you could feel.

The first thing I reached for was key shortening: imageUrl becomes u, fileSize becomes f. The file shrank by 19%, and for a moment I felt I had made progress. Then I measured what actually travels over the wire — the gzipped size — and the saving was 3.2%. A poor return for giving up readable field names.

So where do the real savings live? This is a record of testing each assumption until the numbers answered.

The Setup — a 20,000-Item Synthetic Catalog

Everything was measured with Node v22.22.3 and the built-in zlib module, nothing else. Since I cannot publish the production catalog, I generated synthetic data with the same field structure, using a seeded random generator. The seed is fixed, so running the script reproduces the exact byte counts below.

Each record has twelve fields typical of a wallpaper catalog: ID, title, category, a tags array, resolution, file size, two image URLs, a premium flag, a creation timestamp, and a sort score. Twenty thousand of them.

// gen.js — Node v22.22.3, no dependencies (zlib is built in)
const zlib = require('zlib');
const fs = require('fs');
 
// Seeded PRNG (mulberry32) so every run reproduces the same catalog
function mulberry32(a) {
  return function () {
    a |= 0; a = (a + 0x6D2B79F5) | 0;
    let t = Math.imul(a ^ (a >>> 15), 1 | a);
    t = (t + Math.imul(t ^ (t >>> 7), 61 | t)) ^ t;
    return ((t ^ (t >>> 14)) >>> 0) / 4294967296;
  };
}
const rand = mulberry32(20260805);
const cats = ['nature','city','space','abstract','animal','flower','sea','sky','night','minimal'];
const words = ['sakura','yozora','umi','yama','hikari','kaze','ame','yuki','hoshi','tsuki','asa','yugure','mori','kawa','sora','kumo'];
const pick = (a) => a[Math.floor(rand() * a.length)];
 
const N = 20000;
const items = [];
for (let i = 0; i < N; i++) {
  const id = i + 1;
  const cat = pick(cats);
  items.push({
    id,
    title: `${pick(words)}-${pick(words)}-${String(id).padStart(5, '0')}`,
    category: cat,
    tags: [pick(words), pick(words), pick(words)],
    width: [1080, 1170, 1290][Math.floor(rand() * 3)],
    height: [1920, 2532, 2796][Math.floor(rand() * 3)],
    fileSize: Math.floor(rand() * 4000000) + 200000,
    imageUrl: `https://cdn.example.com/wallpapers/${cat}/${id}/original.jpg`,
    thumbUrl: `https://cdn.example.com/wallpapers/${cat}/${id}/thumb.jpg`,
    premium: rand() < 0.2,
    createdAt: new Date(1600000000000 + Math.floor(rand() * 150000000000)).toISOString(),
    sortScore: Math.round(rand() * 100000) / 100,
  });
}

Against this baseline I prepared four transformations:

// B: shorten every key to one letter (imageUrl → u, etc.)
const KM = { id:'i', title:'t', category:'c', tags:'g', width:'w', height:'h',
             fileSize:'f', imageUrl:'u', thumbUrl:'v', premium:'p', createdAt:'d', sortScore:'s' };
const B = items.map((o) => { const r = {}; for (const k in o) r[KM[k]] = o[k]; return r; });
 
// C: drop both URLs (the client can rebuild them from category and id)
const C = items.map(({ imageUrl, thumbUrl, ...rest }) => rest);
 
// D: columnar — transpose the array of objects into one array per field
const keys = Object.keys(items[0]);
const D = {};
for (const k of keys) D[k] = items.map((o) => o[k]);
 
// E: columnar + URL removal combined
const E = {};
for (const k of keys.filter((k) => k !== 'imageUrl' && k !== 'thumbUrl')) E[k] = items.map((o) => o[k]);
 
// Measure raw / gzip(level 6, 9) / Brotli(quality 11) for each
for (const [name, v] of Object.entries({ A: items, B, C, D, E })) {
  const s = JSON.stringify(v);
  console.log(name, {
    raw: Buffer.byteLength(s),
    gz6: zlib.gzipSync(s, { level: 6 }).length,
    gz9: zlib.gzipSync(s, { level: 9 }).length,
    br11: zlib.brotliCompressSync(s, { params: { [zlib.constants.BROTLI_PARAM_QUALITY]: 11 } }).length,
  });
}

gzip level 6 matches the default of most CDNs and reverse proxies. Brotli runs at quality 11, the setting you would use for precompressed static files.

Five Formats, Measured

The results first. Every reduction percentage is relative to baseline A in the same column.

Formatrawgzip(6)gzip(9)Brotli(11)gzip(6) reduction
A baseline (array of objects)7,035,702943,796891,579691,526
B short keys5,695,702913,189883,867664,434−3.2%
C URLs removed4,185,850745,072704,625559,871−21.1%
D columnar4,695,841691,065648,090556,131−26.8%
E columnar + no URLs2,285,963534,016523,630451,554−43.4%

Notice how the raw reductions and the gzipped reductions refuse to line up. B cuts raw size by 19.0% but ships only 3.2% smaller. C cuts raw by 40.5% yet ships 21.1% smaller. D, meanwhile, cuts raw by 33.3% and keeps most of it — 26.8% — after compression.

The intuition that a smaller file means proportionally lighter delivery simply does not hold once compression sits in the path.

Thank you for reading this far.

Continue Reading

What follows includes implementation code, benchmarks, and practical content we hope you'll find useful. This site runs without ads — server and development costs are supported entirely by members like you. If it's been helpful, we'd be truly grateful for your support.

WHAT YOU'LL LEARN
Five payload formats measured on a 20,000-item catalog, with a full comparison table for raw, gzip, Brotli, and JSON.parse time
Why key-name shortening saves only 3.2% after gzip, while transposing to a columnar layout reaches a 26.8% reduction
Splitting into 40 pages costs just 2.9% in size — measured evidence that pagination is nearly free
Secure payment via Stripe · Cancel anytime

Unlock This Article

Get full access to the rest of this article. Buy once, read anytime. This site is ad-free — your support goes directly toward keeping it running.

or
Unlock all articles with Membership →
Share

Thank You for Reading

Rork Lab is ad-free, supported entirely by members like you. We publish practical guides daily with implementation code, benchmarks, and production-ready patterns. If you've found it useful, we'd love to have you on board.

  • Copy-paste ready implementation code
  • New advanced guides published daily
  • $5/mo or $10 for lifetime access
View Membership →

Related Articles

App Dev2026-08-18
The three places I had to fix before a Rork project actually targeted API level 36
My app.json said targetSdkVersion 36. The value my build actually read was 35. Here is the script that reports the effective value, and how I split my apps between raising, leaving alone, and requesting an extension.
App Dev2026-08-16
My chart broke on day one, not at scale
A line chart that vanished for anyone with only a few days of data. The cause was a zero-height Y axis turning coordinates into NaN. Here is the measured behavior and the small normalization layer that fixed it.
App Dev2026-08-06
Deciding overlay text legibility at ingest time instead of on device — four metrics measured side by side
Moving the question of whether text stays readable over a wallpaper out of the device and into the content pipeline. Four candidate metrics measured across 240 images, including what downscaled judging actually computes.
📚RECOMMENDED BOOKS
Build a Large Language Model (From Scratch)
Sebastian Raschka
LLM Dev
Prompt Engineering for LLMs
Berryman & Ziegler
Prompting
AI Engineering
Chip Huyen
AI Eng
* Contains affiliate links
See all →