From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | vev(at)michvhf(dot)com (Vince Vielhaber) |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] to text or not to text |
Date: | 1999-03-22 23:54:22 |
Message-ID: | 199903222354.SAA24257@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> The docs say that the text type is the "Best choice" of the character data
> types. It was always my understanding that the text type was stored else-
> where in the database and a pointer to it was stored in the actual table.
> Does PostgreSQL do this or is a more efficient way been found? It seems
> that it'd be too expensive to store it elsewhere. I'm making some changes
> to a table and wanted to optomize it (varchar vs text).
Internally, text is stored just like char(). Only large objects are
stored outside the database.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-03-23 01:12:43 | Re: [HACKERS] optimizer and type question |
Previous Message | Taral | 1999-03-22 23:53:59 | Re: [HACKERS] optimizer and type question |