From: | pnews(at)modulo(dot)org |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | underlying structure: varchar vs. text |
Date: | 2001-05-01 23:00:20 |
Message-ID: | 9cnf64$7fd$1@news.netmar.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
I'm trying to store anywhere from a few words to a half page of text as a
field in my table. A fellow db programmer told me that better than using a
varchar is to break the message up into n pieces of size m (let's say m=100),
and make n (or n+1) varchar(m)s, and relate them together.
He is worried that varchars allocate and hold space.
I'm not sure if that is actually more efficient, nor do I know the limit
of how big you can make a varchar.
Additionally, at what size is it practical to use a text type?
I'm running postgreql 7.0.3
Thank you,
b
----- Posted via NewsOne.Net: Free (anonymous) Usenet News via the Web -----
http://newsone.net/ -- Free reading and anonymous posting to 60,000+ groups
NewsOne.Net prohibits users from posting spam. If this or other posts
made through NewsOne.Net violate posting guidelines, email abuse(at)newsone(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas F. O'Connell | 2001-05-01 23:05:41 | do views cache functions? (was Re: do functions cache views?) |
Previous Message | Thomas F. O'Connell | 2001-05-01 22:59:34 | Re: do functions cache views? |