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

Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance

From: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp
To: Brett McCormick <brett(at)work(dot)chicken(dot)org>
Cc: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp, "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 08:27:17
Message-ID: 199803160827.RAA05629@srapc451.sra.co.jp (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?

Good point. I asked him the same question. He needed a chararcter
vector in that each char represents an individual value. Rather than
using substr(), an array might be more intuitive, he said.

>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

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Luuk de BoerDate: 1998-03-16 08:29:00
Subject: Re: [QUESTIONS] MySQL benchmark page
Previous:From: Brett McCormickDate: 1998-03-16 08:15:08
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance

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