Re: [GENERAL] char(xx) problem

From: Herouth Maoz <herouth(at)oumail(dot)openu(dot)ac(dot)il>
To: "pgsql-general" <pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] char(xx) problem
Date: 1999-12-21 12:08:50
Message-ID: l03130301b4851b846903@[147.233.159.109]
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

At 4:02 +0200 on 17/12/1999, Gene Selkov, Jr. wrote:

> I'm just wondering: are there any alternatives to blank padding? Why
> is it done in the first place?

That's how fixed-length char type works, since the early days of SQL. You
come to expect it, which means that if you use legacy code that has a
fixed-width char type, or you decided to use it for its time-saving
possibilities, it should behave according to some way which has been
established long ago.

What I don't get is why, given two bpchar argument, Postgres doesn't just
pad the shorter one to the length of the other and then compares, selects
and whatnot.

Herouth

--
Herouth Maoz, Internet developer.
Open University of Israel - Telem project
http://telem.openu.ac.il/~herouth/personal/

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karl DeBisschop 1999-12-21 13:16:11 Cannot index large table in 6.5.3 on Linux
Previous Message Tim Ayers 1999-12-21 10:19:42