Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance

From: Hal Snyder <hal(at)vailsys(dot)com>
To: lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
Cc: hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Date: 1998-03-11 17:15:34
Message-ID: 199803111715.LAA09970@crocodile.vail
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 14:39:23 +0000
> From: "Thomas G. Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
...
> The char2,4,8,16 types seem to have no value-added over the
> better-supported char(), varchar(), text types; I am considering
> removing them from the backend, and instead have the parser
> transparently translate the types into varchar() (or char() - I'm not
> certain which is a better match for the types) for v6.4. Applications
> would not have to be changed.
>
> Comments?

I'm not up on the details of PostgreSQL's differing character types,
but wonder - would the proposed change break any apps where trailing
(or leading?) whitespace is significant? Not that I'm running any
...

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1998-03-11 18:50:13 Re: AW: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Previous Message Kent S. Gordon 1998-03-11 17:04:13 Re: [HACKERS] postgres/alpha problems