| From: | Wei Weng <wweng(at)kencast(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Does this matter? |
| Date: | 2002-11-01 20:52:22 |
| Message-ID: | 1036183942.25096.3.camel@Monet |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance pgsql-sql |
Josh:
Since I need to use a GUID as the primary key, I have to use the char
datatype.
On Fri, 2002-11-01 at 15:23, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Wei,
>
> > Does it make a performance difference if I use a char(20) or a char(36)
> > as the primary key? My thought is no, but I would like to hear more
> > opinions.
>
> Yes, it does, though probably minor unless you have millions of records. CHAR
> is padded out to the specified length. Therefore the index on a char(36)
> column will be a little larger, and thus a little slower, than the char(20).
Does it affect the INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE operations on tables or simply
the SELECT operation or both?
>
> Now, there would be no difference between VARCHAR(20) and VARCHAR(36) unless
> you used some of the extra 16 characters on most rows.
>
> Either way, for tables of a few thousand records, I doubt that you'll notice
> the difference. BTW, why not use a SERIAL value as a surrogate primary key?
>
> > And a little further off topic(since we have many database experts
> > here), does it matter on MS SQL server 7?
>
> Yes, same reason.
--
Wei Weng
Network Software Engineer
KenCast Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Philip Hallstrom | 2002-11-01 20:53:29 | Re: Does this matter? |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2002-11-01 20:23:48 | Re: Does this matter? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Philip Hallstrom | 2002-11-01 20:53:29 | Re: Does this matter? |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2002-11-01 20:23:48 | Re: Does this matter? |