Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance

From: Brett McCormick <brett(at)work(dot)chicken(dot)org>
To: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp
Cc: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Date: 1998-03-16 08:15:08
Message-ID: 13580.57158.671556.881613@abraxas.scene.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
hmm.. well until the grammar gets fixed, create table c(c _char)
should work, as _typename is the typename from an array of that type.
Although I don't see what advantages a character array has over text?

On Mon, 16 March 1998, at 15:20:36, t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp wrote:

> Please do not remove char2! Some users uses it for making an array of
> char.
> 
> create table c(c char2[]);
> 
> Seems strange? Yes. Actually what he wanted to do was:
> 
> test=> create table c(c char[]);
> ERROR:  parser: parse error at or near "["
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
> t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: t-ishiiDate: 1998-03-16 08:27:17
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Previous:From: Vadim B. MikheevDate: 1998-03-16 08:09:07
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] Does Storage Manager support >2GB tables?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group