> I had thought that char2-16 add _no_ functionality over the char() and
> varchar() types; Tatsuo points out at least one capability which they
> have. Are there any others?
> 
> They give and take a char * pointer to a C function like
> create function upper(char16)
> returning char16 as '/u/my/upper.so' language 'sql';
> whereas char() gives a varlena pointer.

I don't really see this as a big deal since, for example, only 16 bytes
are allocated for a char16, so it is not guaranteed to be zero delimited
and you have to make a working copy to use libc functions anyway. Also,
that is really an implementation detail or annoyance rather than a
user-visible feature.

With the macros that are provided for the varlena structure
manipulations, things are pretty convenient. Are there more macros which
could be helpful here??

                       - Tom

In response to

• AW: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance at 1998-03-19 16:55:32 from Zeugswetter Andreas

Responses

• Re: AW: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance at 1998-03-19 19:50:11 from Bruce Momjian

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Darren King	Date: 1998-03-19 17:29:18
	Subject: Re: AW: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Previous:	From: Massimo Dal Zotto	Date: 1998-03-19 17:25:04
	Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] patches for 6.2.1p6